Petroleum resource potential of sedimentary basins on the pacific margin of Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There are three major sedimentary basins on the Pacific margin of Canada: the Tofino Basin, which overlies the present convergent plate margin west of Vancouver Island; the Queen Charlotte Basin, a transtensional basin lying adjacent to the transform boundary between the North American and Pacific plates; and the Georgia Basin, a sedimentary basin with foreland affinities in Late Cretaceous to Eocene time, which in the southeast is overlain by the Fraser River delta. The location of these sedimentary basins at complex plate margins has resulted in a variety of depositional settings that have affected source rock potential and reservoir development. The plate interactions have resulted in a highly variable and complicated tectonic history, which has influenced trap formation, maturation history and petroleum migration. Limited gas production from Pleistocene sediments in the Fraser delta, a good gas show in a well on the Olympic Peninsula and numerous seepages and other indications of hydrocarbons at surface, in wells and on seismic sections throughout the area, all point to an unrealized hydrocarbon potential. The probabilistic assessment of oil and gas potential for the sedimentary basins on the Pacific margin indicates that the total median estimate of in-place hydrocarbon volumes for all west coast basins is in the order of 1560 x 106m3 (9.8 x 109\~bbl) of oil and 1228 x 109m3 (43.4 TCF) of gas. There are no discovered reserves in these west coast plays, but some 97 gas pools larger than 3 x 109m3, and two oil pools larger than 160 x 106m3, are expected to be present. Several of the conceptual plays have significant potential with respect to undiscovered gas volume, particularly the Pliocene and Miocene gas plays in Queen Charlotte Basin and the Tertiary structural play in the Tofino region. Estimates for oil potential are less optimistic.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".