SPE-177139-MS

Evaluation of Mexicos Shale Oil and Gas Potential

S. H. Stevens and K. D. Moodhe, Advanced Resources International, inc

Copyright 2015, Society of Petroleum Engineers

This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE Latin American and Caribbean Petroleum Engineering Conference held in Quito, Ecuador, 18 20 November
2015.
This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE 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 Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect
any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper without the written
consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers 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 SPE copyright.

Abstract
Mexico has significant oil and gas resource potential in Jurassic and Cretaceous age shale formations. These
shale deposits -- which correlate with productive shale plays in the USA -- appear prospective but are still in
the early stage of exploration and thus remain poorly characterized. Early shale exploration wells tested mostly
low rates, but a recent oil well made 500 bopd while a shale gas well reached 10.9 MMcfd.
The Mexican government plans to offer shale exploration blocks through an international auction. As
part of a multi-client study, the authors have greatly expanded the geologic and reservoir data set we
developed during an earlier scoping-level study conducted for the US Energy Information Administration
(EIA). The additional geologic data support our initial view that Mexico has some of the largest and best
quality shale potential outside the US and Canada. Risked, technically recoverable resources were
estimated in the EIA/ARI study at 13.1 BBO of oil and 545 Tcf of natural gas.
Detailed geologic mapping and analysis indicates the two most prospective liquids-rich shale areas in
Mexico occur within onshore portions of the Burgos and Tampico-Misantla basins, which have transport
infrastructure and well services. Significant potential also exists in the Veracruz, Macuspana, Sabinas, and other
onshore basins, but those areas tend to be structurally more complex and/or are mostly in the dry gas window.
The U. Cretaceous Eagle Ford Shale (in the Burgos) and correlative Agua Nueva Formation (in the
Tampico-Misantla) have high TOC and brittle carbonate-rich mineralogy, but their net prospective area
is reduced due to often shallow burial depth and low thermal maturity. A better target appears to be the
U. Jurassic Pimienta and La Casita formations, which can be thick (~200 m), at prospective depth over
much larger areas, are in the volatile oil to wet gas windows, and frequently overpressured, although TOC
is lower than in the Agua Nueva.

Introduction
The greater Gulf of Mexico Basin extends south from the onshore Gulf Coast of the US into northeastern
Mexico (Fig. 1). Equivalent shale formations, such as the Eagle Ford and Haynesville/Bossier shale plays
in the US, also are present south of the international border, where they are considered important source
rocks for conventional oil and gas deposits. As such, Mexico offers relatively low-risk shale exploration
targets compared with other countries, such as China and Australia, which have entirely different geologic
histories and present-day settings.

SPE-177139-MS

Figure 1Shale Basins in Northeast Mexico, Showing Unconventional Exploration Blocks Scheduled for Rounds 1 4

SPE-177139-MS

Our previous scoping-level study for the US Department of Energys Energy Information Administration (EIA) documented that shale oil and gas resources in northeast Mexico are large and prospective
(EIA/ARI, 2013). At that time, with limited geologic data, we estimated risked, technically recoverable
resources in Mexico to be approximately 13.1 BBO of oil and 545 Tcf of natural gas (104 BBOE; Table
1). Our recent more detailed work, based on a much larger public data set that we compiled, generally
supports this analysis, while providing more granularity on the geologic variability and prospectivity of
individual basins.

Table 1Estimated Shale Gas and Shale Oil Resources in Mexico

Mexicos national oil company Pemex recently published its own estimates of shale oil and gas
resources in Mexico, although their methodology and assumptions have not been disclosed. Pemex most
recent estimate for shale resources in Mexico is 60.2 BBOE, comprising 31.9 BBO of oil, 36.8 Tcf of wet
natural gas, and 104.1 Tcf of dry natural gas (Pemex, 2014a). These estimates include both the U.
Cretaceous and U. Jurassic shales in the Tampico-Misantla, Burgos, Burro-Picachos, and other basins.
The US Geological Survey independently estimated much smaller resources of 0.776 BBO, 23.474 Tcf,
and 0.883 BB of natural gas liquids (mean estimates), but did not release its geologic maps (USGS, 2014).
Pemex initiated shale exploration drilling in 2010 and to date has completed over 30 horizontal test
wells treated with large hydraulic stimulations. A further 29 shale wells are planned during 20152019.
Drilling has been concentrated in the Burgos Basin south of Texas, along with several wells in the

SPE-177139-MS

Tampico-Misantla and Sabinas basins. The initial wells have tested mostly low rates but a few recent wells
were more productive, particularly in the Pimienta Fm of the southern Burgos Basin.
Note that these early horizontal test wells were relatively shallow, targeting shale formations at depths
of 1,000 to 2,500 m. In contrast, many shale plays in the US target deeper areas, such as the Bakken Shale
in the Williston Basin, where horizontal development is focused at depths of about 3,300 m with greater
reservoir pressure. Despite the slow start, it appears likely that once geologic sweet spots are defined and
well completion practices refined, shale resources could play a major role in Mexicos plans to boost
natural gas output, reduce gas imports from the US, and maintain or even grow its recently declining oil
output.
As part of Mexicos ongoing major reforms of the petroleum industry, the Comisin Nacional de
Hidrocarburos (CNH) plans to hold a series of international auction rounds of blocks with unconventional
oil and gas potential. CNH has identified an estimated 21.642 BBOE of potential in 291 blocks totaling
33,959 km2 in the Burgos, Burro-Picachos, Tampico-Misantla and other onshore basins (SENER, 2015).
Mexicos shale resource potential is significant, but numerous challenges remain, including security, the
availability of low-cost well services, and a scarcity of geologic and reservoir data on shale rock
properties. On the other hand, the close proximity to shale services, expertise, and funding sources in the
US and Canada gives Mexico a leg up over other countries which are seeking to jump start their shale
industries.
Mexicos shale service sector is gradually building the necessary capability for large-scale horizontal
drilling combined with massive multi-stage hydraulic stimulation. Only a small number of horizontal
shale gas and oil wells have been tested thus far, with generally low but still encouraging production rates.
Large-scale commercial production appears to be some years in the future. Considerable work is needed
to define the geologic sweet spots, develop the service sectors capacity to effectively and economically
drill and stimulate modern horizontal shale wells, and install the extensive surface infrastructure needed
to transport product to market.

Data Control and Methodology

A significant challenge in assessing Mexicos shale resources is data availability. Much of the basic
geologic and well data that is publicly available in other countries is confidential in Mexico. However, a
wealth of geologic data on source rock shales has been published over the years in various Mexican
journals and university theses. We utilized these public sources to develop a proprietary GIS data base of
shale geology in Mexico, compiled from nearly 500 Spanish and English language technical articles, most
of which were written pre-shale and concerned conventional source rock geology. Data locations plotted
on our Mexico maps provide an indication of geologic control (Fig. 2).

SPE-177139-MS

Figure 2The Shale Trend in Northeast Mexico is Significantly Larger than the South Texas Eagle Ford Shale Play; Data Locations for
Study are Indicated

SPE-177139-MS

With a total 5,000 mapped shale geologic and reservoir data points, we had reasonably good control
of thickness, depth, structure, lithology, and thermal maturity for the principal U. Cretaceous and U.
Jurassic shale targets across northeast Mexico. Geochemical data such as TOC and HI control were less
abundant. Published log and seismic images were mostly of poor quality and not suitable for petrophysical
analysis, though still useful for correlation and defining general shale characteristics. We found limited
data on subsurface hydrology and shale physical properties, notably mineralogy which was rarely of
interest prior to the advent of shale exploration.
Our methodology for assessing Mexicos shale resources was described in further detail in EIA/ARI,
2013. We applied typical screening criteria of shale thickness, minimum and maximum depth, total
organic carbon content (TOC), thermal maturity indicated by vitrinite reflectance (Ro), and mineralogy.
High-graded areas within the basins considered prospective for shale gas and shale oil exploration were
mapped and characterized. We then estimated technically recoverable resources (TRR) from the original
oil (or gas) in place (OOIP or OGIP) based on the range of actual recovery factors currently achieved in
North American shale plays. Finally, we applied risk factors commonly employed by shale operators.
However, the economic viability of the TRR was not assessed in our study.
The discrete steps in the EIA/ARI evaluation were:
1. Translate nearly 500 mostly Spanish language technical articles and develop a GIS data base of
geologic and reservoir properties.
2. Characterize the geologic and reservoir properties of each shale basin and formation.
3. Establish the areal extent of the shale gas and shale oil formations.
4. Define and characterize the prospective area for each shale gas and shale oil formation based on
thickness, depth, TOC, and thermal maturity.
5. Estimate the risked shale gas and shale oil in-place based on a) overall play probability of success
and b) play area probability of success.
6. Using recovery factors from similar shales in the US estimate the technically recoverable shale gas
and shale oil resource.

Shale Basins and Formations in Mexico

Large sedimentary basins extend across onshore northeast Mexico, containing rich petroleum source rocks
with suitable thickness, depth, organic content, and thermal maturity for shale gas/oil exploration. The two
most prospective basins appear to be the Burgos Basin, extending south of Texas, and the smaller
Tampico-Misantla Basin further to the southeast in Veracruz and adjoining states. Other basins (Sabinas,
Veracruz, Macuspana) also have shale potential, but overall they tend to be structurally more complex
and/or in the dry gas window and are presented in less detail here.
Two principal marine-deposited shale exploration targets are present in northeast Mexico, each one
considered an important source rock for the conventional oil and gas fields which have been discovered
in the region (Fig. 3). The Upper Cretaceous Eagle Ford, Agua Nueva and equivalent formations may
perhaps be more familiar to US explorationists. This shale formation has been intensively developed in
South Texas, making its direct extension into northern Coahuila State an obvious target. But after data
gathering and analysis, we were surprised at how relatively limited the Eagle Ford prospective area is in
Mexico, due to structural trends, insufficient burial depth, and low or high thermal maturity.

SPE-177139-MS

Figure 3Stratigraphy of the Burgos Basin Showing U. Cretaceous Agua Nueva (Eagle Ford) Fm and U. Jurassic Pimienta (La Casita)
Fm. Note Listric Normal Faults Cutting Tertiary Section Flatten into Detachment Surface, Dont Affect Mesozoic Section

The more prospective target appears to be the Upper Jurassic (Tithonian) Pimienta, La Casita, and
equivalent formations. These organic-rich black shale to shaly limestone deposits, which are near
time-equivalent with the Haynesville-Bossier Shale in Louisiana, were deposited in a broad marine basin
under anoxic conditions. Lithologies range from shales, argillaceous limestones, to thin-bedded lime
mudstone with chert layers. While the Tithonian generally has somewhat less TOC than the U. Cretaceous
(23% vs 4 5% in the richer zones), it occurs at suitable burial depth over much larger areas, and more
often is in the optimal wet gas to volatile oil thermal maturity windows.
Furthermore, additional shale targets directly underlie the Pimienta, such as the Taman, San Andres,
Santiago and equivalent formations of Oxfordian to Kimmeridgian age. While not as laterally persistent
as the Tithonian, these units can be equally or more organic-rich and offer secondary shale completion
zones. An analogy could be the Three Forks and Mid-Bakken units in the Williston Basin, now a two-fer
play with optionality. The Oxfordian in Mexico is about 500 m deeper than the Tithonian, giving it higher
reservoir pressure and thermal maturity, although our data control was weaker.

Burgos Basin
CNH plans to offer 124 blocks totaling 14,406 km2 in the Burgos Basin under Bid Rounds 2 4, with an
estimated 6.486 BBOE of unconventional resources. Stretching south from the Texas border, the Burgos
has been the focus of Pemex initial shale exploration activity. Two main shale targets are present: the U.
Cretaceous Eagle Ford Shale in the north Burgos, with a relatively small prospective area just south of the

SPE-177139-MS

Texas border; and the U. Jurassic Pimienta and La Casita formations in the south Burgos, extending over
a much larger prospective area and probably with greater resource potential. Mexicos best horizontal
shale well to date, the 750-boepd Anhelido-1, was completed here in the Pimienta Fm.
Production of natural gas from conventional sandstone reservoirs began in the Burgos Basin as early
as 1945. Gas output peaked in 2010 and has since declined to the current 1.2 Bcfd. Condensate production
associated with natural gas also peaked in 2010, and currently is about 18,000 bbl/d and declining (Pemex,
2014b). Shale gas development in the Burgos could help stem the rise of, or even reduce, gas imports from
the US, which currently exceed 2 Bcfd and are increasing quickly as major pipeline infrastructure
expansions are completed, to a reported 8 Bcfd capacity by the end of 2015 (Seelke et al., 2015).
Data availability for the Burgos Basin overall was good, comprising over 2,000 data points (well logs,
cross-section control points, outcrop samples) extracted from more than 250 published articles and
university theses, mostly in Spanish. Basic data on depth, thickness, thermal maturity, and other shale
properties were abundant for both U. Cretaceous Eagle Ford and U. Jurassic Pimienta formations, but the
data were not suitable for advanced petrophysical or seismic analysis.
The Burgos Basin is located south of the Rio Grande Embayment, east of the Burro Salado Arch, north
of the Tampico-Misantla Basin (which contains similar Mesozoic shale targets), and northeast of the
Sierra Madre Oriental thrust belt. The basin extends offshore but our shale study was limited to onshore.
It formed by extension associated with salt deposition during the Jurassic to Early Cretaceous. Later on
it was affected by Laramide (late Cretaceous) compression, followed by strike slip faulting during the
Oligocene along the Rio Bravo left-lateral fault zone (Flotte et al., 2008). The Burgos contains a thick
Tertiary sequence which hosts numerous mostly small conventional and tight natural gas fields.
Closely spaced mostly normal faults associated with folds deform the Tertiary sequence and form
conventional hydrocarbon traps (Hernandez-Mendoza et al., 2008). Fortunately, most of these faults
flatten into a detachment surface near or above the Cretaceous-Tertiary boundary and do not appear to cut
the shale-prospective Mesozoic section (Fig. 4; Ortiz-Ubilla and Tolson, 2014). Thus the geologic
structure of the Burgos may be favorable for the deeper shale targets.

Figure 4 West-East Cross Section of Burgos Basin, Note Tertiary Detachment Faults Underlain by Less Deformed Mesozoic Shale

Pemex began its shale exploration program targeting the Eagle Ford Shale and later extended to the
Pimienta Fm. The companys first shale exploration well, the Emergente-1 well drilled in 2010, is located
just south of the Texas border. The 4,071-m well (measured depth) targeted the 175-m thick Eagle Ford

SPE-177139-MS

Shale at subsurface depths of 2350 2525 m. Its 1300-m lateral was oriented due south and positioned in
the organic-rich lower Eagle Ford zone, where TOC reaches 4.5%. As the first of its type the Emergente-1
took five months to drill, whereas recent comparable wells in Mexico can now be drilled in about one
month. Following a 17-stage frac employing 8 million gallons of slickwater and 42,563 sacks of quartz
sand proppant, the well produced an initial gas rate of 2.8 MMcfd (Zavala-Torres, 2014).
The Eagle Ford Shale in the nearby Habano-1 shale test well had micritic matrix with detrital clay,
planktonic foraminifera, sealed with calcite and authigenic clay, occasional pyrite. Samples measured
54% calcite, 18% quartz, and 19% clay (type not noted), with 9% other minerals (Martinez Contreras,
2015). The Montas-1 well measured 1.95% average TOC in the upper Eagle Ford Shale, increasing to
2.71% average in the lower zone. Subsequent Eagle Ford Shale wells in the northern Burgos all tested
low-moderate oil and gas rates, much lower than from the Pimienta Fm in the southern Burgos, but it is
not clear whether due to rock quality or perhaps fracture stimulation design.
As of mid-2014 Pemex had completed three horizontal large-frac wells targeting the more promising
Pimienta Fm in the southern Burgos Basin; three others were undergoing completion (Araujo et al., 2014).
In 2012 the Anhelido-1 well was completed in the Pimienta Fm at a mean measured depth of 2,111 m.
The Pimienta here consists of marine-deposited black shale and shaly limestone containing Type II/III
kerogen, divided into four intervals with varying concentration of carbonate mineralogy and TOC
richness, which ranged up to 4%. Tmax of 450 454C indicates condensate to wet gas thermal maturity.
XRD measured favorably brittle mineralogy: 70% calcite, 1% dolomite, 10% quartz, and 11% illite clay.
Porosity was estimated at 7%. The fracture gradient was a moderate 0.92 1.02 psi/ft. The nearby
Arbolero-1 shale well tested 0.55 psi/ft reservoir pressure gradient.
The Anhelido-1 lateral was landed just above the peak radioactivity zone, where clay content was
lower, TOC higher, and the formation considered more brittle. They conducted a 17-stage hydraulic
stimulation, employing 5.1 million lbs sand proppant and 12 million gallons of frac fluid. Each stage
utilized five 1-m long frac clusters, with 20 shots/meter that were deep penetrating and 60 phased.
Formation brittleness was homogeneous along the lateral, and the evenly spaced stages received uniform
stimulation based on radioactive tracers. This stimulation resulted in estimated 133-m propped fracture
length and 95-m propped fracture height.
The Anhelido-1 well was the first horizontal frac shale well to produce oil from the Pimienta Fm, and
achieved a production rate higher than any of the Eagle Ford wells up to that time. Initial production was
about 500 bopd of 37 API oil with 1.5 MMcfd of wet gas (24-hour rate). Production dropped rapidly but
stabilized at 80 90 bopd with 0.6 MMcfd of gas after one year on line. Pemex reported cumulative
production of about 40,000 bbl of oil during the first year, with estimated ultimate recovery (EUR) of over
100,000 bbl (cumulative gas was not reported). Such an early test well, while probably not economic,
would be considered promising in any new shale basin. There appears to be good potential to further
increase productivity by optimizing the stratigraphic landing zone, well and frac design, and other
parameters.
Another well, the Tangram-1 encountered 215 m thick Pimienta Fm in a thermally more mature dry
gas window. The well tested 10.9 MMcfd of dry gas, the highest rate for a shale gas well in Mexico thus
far.
In-situ stress data on the shale targets are not available in the Burgos, but the overlying Eocene tight
sandstones have tested low stress. For example, one well measured 6,150 psi closure stress at a depth of
3,217 m., for a favorably low 0.58 psi/ft frac gradient (Medina Eleno and Valenzuela, 2010). This suggests
that hydraulic stimulation of shale targets in the basin could be effective.
The very large Burgos Basin faces certain operational challenges compared with similar basins in the
US and Canada, due to limited pipeline infrastructure and local security issues. On the other hand,
hydraulic stimulation has been applied for some years in tight gas development, providing a certain degree
of local well service capability. Whereas the Burgos is an arid area compared with coastal Tampico-

10

SPE-177139-MS

Misantla, extensive ground water resources are present in the Cretaceous Agua Nueva and Cupido
formations. For example, the latter is about 200 m thick, with fresh to brackish conditions 380 1,350 ppm
TDS at 600 700 m depth (Conagua, 2009). Groundwater could provide a source of fluid for hydraulic
stimulation in the basin.

Tampico-Misantla Basin
Somewhat smaller than the Burgos Basin, but with sizeable prospective liquids-rich windows, the
Tampico-Misantla Basin (TMB) is the primary focus of CNHs upcoming Round 1 unconventional
license auction. CNH plans to offer a total 158 license blocks covering 17,625 km2 and with an estimated
17.625 BBOE of resource potential under Bid Rounds 1 through 4 (Fig. 5). This does not include Round
0 areas retained by Pemex, mostly in the southern half of the basin, which also may have good shale
potential.

Figure 5Unconventional Oil and Gas Exploration Blocks Planned for the Tampico-Misantla Basin (CNH)

The southern portion of the TMB hosts the well-known Chicontepec complex, a series of conventional
oil fields which since discovery in 1904 have produced a cumulative 5.5 BBO and 7.5 Tcf from over
20,000 wells. Production is mainly from Tertiary conventional and tight sandstones and naturally
fractured Cretaceous carbonates in structural traps (Fig. 6). These conventional oil fields produce 1535
API gravity crude from 1,500 2,500 m depth. Underlying Cretaceous and Jurassic shale reservoirs are
likely to produce higher gravity oil. Sulfur content can be high (5%) in biodegraded shallow conventional
fields but is lower (1%) in deeper fields. Pemex estimates 18.9 Bboe of remaining conventional reserves

SPE-177139-MS

11

in the TMB, but notes that low permeability results in poor recovery factors (~2%) and high full-cycle
costs (Pemex, 2013).

Figure 6 Source Rock Shale Targets in the Tampico-Misantla Basin Include the U. Jurassic Pimienta and Other Formations

Topography within the TMB is mostly flat coastal plain to rolling hills, considered favorable for shale
development. The rugged Sierra Madre Oriental mountains rise rapidly in the west, reaching 4,000 m
elevation outside the basin. The largest city is Poza Rica (193,000), otherwise surface conditions are
mostly rural. The climate is tropical, with moderate 14 24C temperatures and 1.2 m/yr average rainfall,
concentrated during June-October.
Data availability for the TMB overall generally was good, comprising over 2,000 data points (well logs,
cross-section control points, outcrop samples) from more than 1,500 unique mapped locations, extracted
from nearly 150 published articles, mostly in Spanish. Of this total, 763 data points penetrated just down
to the Cretaceous strata, 946 penetrated both the Cretaceous and Jurassic, and 398 points were specifically
on the U. Jurassic Tithonian Pimienta Fm. We recorded 211 partial well log images, of which 150
penetrated the Jurassic.
Initiated in the late Triassic as a pull-apart basin, the NNW-SSE trending Tampico-Misantla Basin
(TMB) transitioned to foreland basin by the Paleocene. The basin is bounded on the east by the Tuxpan
Uplift and Caribbean coastline. The west is bounded by thrusting and folding related to the Laramide-age
Sierra Madre Oriental range. Note that we extended the basin several kilometers to the west beyond the
traditional Cretaceous-Tertiary boundary, where Jurassic shale can still occur at prospective depth.
Faulting inside the basin is relatively minor, mostly high-angle normal faults with h50 m. Structural dip
is gentle, mostly flat lying to about 5 (Fig. 7; Pemex, 2012). Overall, structure appears favorable for shale
development using horizontal drilling.

12

SPE-177139-MS

Figure 7Seismic Time Section Showing Generally Simple Structure of the U. Jurassic Pimienta Fm in Tampico-Misantla Basin

The Upper Cretaceous Agua Nueva Fm is an organic-rich shaly carbonate which has produced oil in
naturally fractured, anticlinal fields within the TMB. Our mapping indicates this unit is too shallow and
thermally immature for economic shale exploration in most of the basin. Instead, we regard the underlying
Upper Jurassic Pimienta Formation as the primary shale target in the TMB: it is depositionally more
widespread, less eroded by the Paleochannel, deeper and at higher pressure, and thermally more mature.
The Pimienta also is considered the main source rock in the TMB.
The Pimienta Fm is an organic-rich black shale to shaly limestone unit that ranges up to 350 m thick,
averaging 150 to 200 m in basinal depositional settings, 50 100 m on slope settings, and thinning to zero
over paleo highs. Note the Pimienta is 23 times thicker than the Eagle Ford Shale in South Texas. During
the Tithonian, high evaporation in restricted basins resulted in lower clay and Type III kerogen than in the
preceding Oxfordian stage. Oils generated from the Tithonian are subtly differentiated from the Oxfordian
by C26 character (Guzman-Vega et al., 2010).
The top of the Pimienta Fm varies from 500 to 4,000 m deep across the TMB. To the east the Pimienta
deepens rapidly offshore to below 5 km. The Tamaulipus Arch uplifted the Pimienta, bifurcating the
prospective area into south and north halves. Note that the underlying Taman, Santiago, and related U.
Jurassic shale targets are an additional ~500 m below the Pimienta and could be secondary targets, or
perhaps primary targets where the Pimienta is too shallow and immature.
We mapped well-defined black oil, volatile oil, wet gas, and dry gas windows for the Pimienta Fm
across the TMB based on Tmax and Ro data. Thermal maturity increases regionally towards the Sierra
Madre Oriental in the west, and also increases gradually with depth. Much of the onshore basin is in the
black to volatile oil windows, with a smaller wet gas and tiny dry gas window in the west.
Microseismic monitoring of the Tertiary at Chicontepec shows that maximum principal horizontal
stress is oriented NE-SW, consistent with regional tectonics, with 40 250 m fracture length (average 130
m). Stress magnitude is uncertain but fracture height growth of around 90 m in the Tertiary sandstone
reservoirs indicates favorably moderate stress (Gutirrez et al., 2014).
The TMB differs from US shale plays in that significant relatively recent (Miocene-Quaternary)
igneous activity has occurred, particularly in the south, which could negatively impact the shale potential

SPE-177139-MS

13

(Ferrari et al., 2005). Fortunately, most of this igneous activity, part of the Trans-Mexican Faja Volcanic
Belt, consisted of shallow extrusive lava flows that followed paleotopography from elevated source areas
in the eastern Sierra Madre Orientale downhill some 90 km across the TMB to the coast.
After screening for depth, thickness, Ro, and igneous intrusions and lava flows, the net high-graded
prospective thermal maturity windows for the U. Jurassic Pimienta Fm that we identified in the TMB are
comparable in size to those of the South Texas Eagle Ford Shale play (12,000 mi2), although the
northern TMB region is poorly constrained.
Pemex has drilled, cored, and hydraulically fractured three horizontal wells in the southern TMB,
landing in the Pimienta Formation which is 92 to 200 m thick and 2,327 to 2,920 m deep (below sea level)
in these penetrations. Data on rock properties and production have not yet been released.
In 2013 Pemex estimated the TMB has 34.8 BBOE of unconventional shale resources from both U.
Cretaceous and U. Jurassic formations, comprising mainly oil (30.7 BBO) with some wet gas (20.7 Tcf)
but no dry gas. EIA/ARIs 2013 estimate for the Pimienta Fm alone was 10.6 BBOE of risked, technically
recoverable resources, comprising a more balanced blend of 6.5 BBO of oil and 24.7 Tcf of mainly wet
natural gas, including a small amount of dry gas.
In 2014 the USGS estimated a much smaller resource of 0.6 BBO and 0.4 Tcf for the TMB (mean
estimate), about two-thirds from the U. Cretaceous Agua Nueva Fm and the balance from the U. Jurassic
Pimienta Fm. The USGS reported screening out 79% of the otherwise prospective Pimienta Fm area based
on a Pemex contour map indicating TOC of less than 2%. However, core data we located indicates this
map may be underestimating actual TOC. In our view the Pimientas greater depth, reservoir pressure, and
thermal maturity make it the more prospective target in the TMB, despite lower overall TOC than in the
Agua Nueva Fm.

Other Basins
Several other basins in Mexico have shale potential. Just west of the Burgos Basin in the Sabinas Basin,
with similar U. Cretaceous and U. Jurassic shale targets that are entirely in the dry gas window, but
significantly folded due to thrusting from the Sierra Madre Oriental mountains as well as local saltwithdrawal tectonics (Soegaard et al., 2003). A shale gas exploration well (Percutor-1) produced 2.17
MMcfd of dry gas from the Eagle Ford Shale at a sub-surface depth of 3,330 3,390 m.
In the Veracruz and Macuspana basins of southeast Mexico, the U. Cretaceous (Turonian) Maltrata
Formation is a significant source rock, with about 100 m of shaly marine limestone and an average 3%
TOC (Type II). Thermal maturity ranges from oil-prone (Ro averaging 0.85%) within the oil window at
depths of less than 11,000 ft, to gas-prone (Ro averaging 1.4%) within the gas window at average depths
below 11,500 ft. The dip angle is relatively steep, thus prospective area appears to be limited to a relatively
long, narrow belt. These other basins are the focus of our continuing evaluation of Mexicos shale oil and
gas potential.

Conclusions
1. Our GIS-based data base of shale geologic and reservoir properties, built with data published in
nearly 500 mostly Spanish language technical articles and university theses, helped us to identify
and characterize the prospective areas within Mexicos shale basins. In all, over 5,000 shale data
points were mapped, including depth, thickness, Ro, and TOC.
2. The new data generally confirms our earlier estimate for EIA that Mexico has approximately 13.1
BBO and 545 Tcf of risked, technically recoverable shale oil and gas resources, while providing
more granularity on where potential sweet spots may be located.
3. The structurally simple southern flank of the Burgos Basin has large shale oil and gas resources
in the U. Jurassic Pimienta Formation. A horizontal shale well here produced 500 bopd of 37 API

14

SPE-177139-MS

crude and 1.5 MMcfd of wet gas. We mapped a large area in the southern Burgos high-graded for
thickness, depth, Ro, and structural simplicity.
4. The Tampico-Misantla Basin has liquids-rich shale potential, particularly for the U. Jurassic
Pimienta Fm. High-graded areas have 100 300 m thick Pimienta shale at a depth of 2 to 4 km
deep, with large areas in the volatile oil to wet gas thermal maturity windows (Ro 0.7 to 1.3%).
5. Other basins (Sabinas, Veracruz, Macuspana) also may be prospective but initial review shows
then to be structurally more complex. The Sabinas Basin is entirely in the dry gas window, while
the Veracruz and Macuspana basins have exceptionally thick source rocks of liquids-rich maturity,
but also are significantly faulted. While CNH has not announced license blocks, these basins could
have good local potential and warrant further study.

Acknowledgments
The authors wish to thank the Energy Information Administration, Chesapeake Energy, ConocoPhillips,
and eight other oil company clients for financial support provided in conducting this study. Vello A.
Kuuskraa contributed to the resource methodology used in this study.
Nomenclature
Bcf
billion (109) cubic feet
bopd
barrels of oil per day
BBO
billion (109) barrels of oil
BBOE
billion (109) barrels of oil equivalent
C
centigrade
CNH
Comisin Nacional de Hidrocarburos
g/cc
grams per cubic centimeter
GIS
geographic information system
km
kilometer
2
square kilometer
km
m
meter
3
cubic meters
m
MMcfd million (106) cubic feet per day
ppm TDS parts per million total dissolved solids
psi/ft
pounds per square inch per foot of depth
vitrinite reflectance
Ro
Tcf
trillion (1012) cubic feet
TOC
total organic carbon
TRR
technically recoverable resources
XRD
x-ray diffraction

References
Araujo, O., Garza, D., Garcia, D., Ortiz, J.R., Bailon, L., and Valenzuela, A., 2014. First Production
Results from Pimienta Oil Source Rock Reservoir, A Promising Shale: Case History from Burgos
Basin, Mexico. Society of Petroleum Engineers, SPE Latin America and Caribbean Petroleum
Engineering Conference, Maracaibo, Venezuela, 2123 May, 2014, SPE 169420, 15 p.
Armstrong-Altrin, J.S., Nagarajan, R., Madhavaraju, J., Rosalez-Hoz, L., Lee, Y.I., Balaram, V.,
Cruz-Martnez, A., and Avila-Ramrez, G., 2013. Geochemistry of the Jurassic and Upper
Cretaceous Shales from the Molango Region, Hidalgo, Eastern Mexico: Implications for Sourcearea Weathering, Provenance, and Tectonic Setting. Comptes Rendus Geoscience, 345: 185202.

SPE-177139-MS

15

CONAGUA (Comisin Nacional del Agua), 2009. Actualizacin De La Disponibilidad Media Anual
De Agua Subterrnea, Acufero (1920) Campo Papagayos, Estado De Nuevo Len. August 28, 22
p.
Ferrari, L., Tagami, T., Eguchi, M., Orozco-Esquivela, M.T., Petrone, C.M., Jacobo-Albarran, J., and
Lopez-Martnez, M., 2005. Geology, Geochronology and Tectonic Setting of Late Cenozoic
Volcanism Along the Southwestern Gulf of Mexico: The Eastern Alkaline Province Revisited. J.
Volcanology Geothermal Res., 146: 284 306.
Flotte, N., Martinez-Reyes, J., Rangin, C., Le Pichon, X., Husson, L., and Tardy, M., 2008. The Rio
Bravo Fault, a Major Late Oligocene Left-Lateral Shear Zone. Bulletin Geological Society of
France, 179: 147160.
Gutirrez, G., Garca, J. G., Medina, E., and Salguero, J., 2014. Uso de Monitoreo Microssmico Para
Optimizar Fracturamientos Hidrulicos en Chicontepec. Ingeniera Petrolera, May, 54: 267281.
Guzmn-Vega, M.A., Clara-Valdez, L., Maldonado-Villaln, R., Martnez-Pontvianne, G., Villanueva-Rodrguez, L., Caballero-Garca, E., Lara-Rodrguez, J., Medrano-Morales, L., PachecoMuoz, J. and Vzquez-Covarrubias, E., 2010. El Origen de los Aceites Pesados en Mxico:
Biodegradacin vs Madurez. Boletn de la Asociacin Mexicana de Gelogos Petroleros, 55: 28.
Hernandez-Mendoza, J.J., DeAngelo, M.V., Wawrzyniec, T.F., and Hentz, T.F., 2008. Major Structural Elements of the Miocene Section, Burgos Basin, Northeastern Mexico. American Association
of Petroleum Geologists, 92: 1479 1499.
Martinez Contreras, J.F., 2015. Estudio Estratigrafico-Geoquimico en Petroleo y gas de Lutitas de la
Formacion Eagle Ford, Noroeste de Villa Hidalgo, Estado de Coahuila, Noreste de Mexico.
Universidad Nacional Autonoma Mexico (UNAM), Masters Thesis, 152 p.
Medina Eleno, L. and Valenzuela, A., 2010. Refracturamientos Hidrulicos Para Incrementar la
Produccin en el Activo Integral Burgos Reynosa. Ingeniera Petrolera, March, 12 p.
Ortiz-Ubilla, A. and Tolson, G., 2004. Interpretacin Estructural de Una Seccin Ssmica en la Regin
ArcabuzCulebra de la Cuenca de Burgos, NE de Mxico. Revista Mexicana de Ciencias
Geologicas, 21: 226 235.
Pemex, 2012. Aceite y Gas en Lutitas. Presentation dated June 21, 2012, 54 p.
Pemex, 2013. Tercera Ronda de Licitaciones en PEP Contratos Integrales de Exploracin y Produccin Aceite Terciario del Golfo. January 22, 105 p.
Pemex, 2014a. Informe Anual 2013 de Petrleos Mexicanos (Annual Report), February 13, 2014, 662
p.
Pemex, 2014b. Presente y Futuro del Proyecto Burgos. May, 38 p.
Sanchez-Gonzalez, R. and Zauco-Martinez, T.A., 2014. Anlisis De Las Alternativas De Explotacin
Del Sector 6 Agua Fra-Coapechaca. Thesis, Universidad Nacional Autnoma De Mxico, 165 p.
Seelke, C.R. Ratner, M., Villarreal, M.A., and Brown, P., 2015. Mexicos Oil and Gas Sector:
Background, Reform Efforts, and Implications for the United States. Congressional Research
Service, July 30, 26 p.
SENER, 2015. Plan Quinquenal de Licitaciones para la Exploracin y Extraccin de Hidrocarburos
20152019. Secretara de Energa, Mexico, 139 p.
Soegaard, K., Ye, H., Halik, N., Daniels, A.T., Arney, J., and Garrick, S., 2003. Stratigraphic
Evolution of Latest Cretaceous to Early Tertiary Difunta Foreland Basin in Northeast Mexico:
Influence of Salt Withdrawal on Tectonically Induced Subsidence by the Sierra Madre Oriental
Fold and Thrust Belt. In C. Bartolini, R. T. Buffler, and J. Blickwede, eds., The Circum-Gulf of
Mexico and the Caribbean: Hydrocarbon Habitats, Basin Formation, and Plate Tectonics,
American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Memoir 79, p. 364 394.
US Geological Survey, Assessment of Unconventional Oil and Gas Resources in Northeast Mexico.
August, 2014, 4 p.