tectonic influences on se asian carbonate systems …searg.rhul.ac.uk/pubs/wilson_hall_2010...

TECTONIC INFLUENCES ON SE ASIAN CARBONATE SYSTEMS

AND THEIR RESERVOIR DEVELOPMENT

MOYRA E.J. WILSON

Department of Applied Geology, Curtin University, GPO Box U1987, Perth, WA 6845, Australia.

E-mail: [email protected]

AND

ROBERT HALL

SE Asia Research Group, Department of Earth Sciences, Royal Holloway University of London,

Egham, Surrey, TW20 OEX, UK

ABSTRACT: SE Asian carbonate formations have been reviewed with the aim of understanding the influence of tectonics on their development and

reservoir potential through the Cenozoic. Regional tectonics, via plate movements, extensional basin formation, and uplift, was the dominant control on

the location of carbonate deposits. These processes controlled the movement of shallow marine areas into the tropics, together with their emergence and

disappearance. Although ; 70% of the 250 shallow marine carbonate formations in SE Asia were initiated as attached features, 90% of economic

hydrocarbon discoveries are in carbonate strata developed over antecedent topography, of which more than 75% were isolated platforms. Faulted highs

influenced the siting of nearly two thirds of carbonates developed over antecedent topography. Around a third of carbonate units formed in intra- and

interarc areas; however, economic reservoirs are mainly in backarc and rift-margin settings (; 40% each). Carbonate edifices show evidence of

syntectonic sedimentation through: (1) fault-margin collapse and resedimentation, (2) fault segmentation of platforms, (3) tilted strata and differential

generation of accommodation space, and (4) modification of internal sequence character and facies distribution. The demise of many platforms, particularly

those forming economic reservoirs, was influenced by tectonic subsidence, often in combination with eustatic sea-level rise and environmental perturbations.

Fractures, if open or widened by dissolution, enhance reservoir quality. However, fracturing may also result in compartmentalization of reservoirs through

formation of fault gouge, or fault leakage via compromised seal integrity. This study will help in reservoir prediction in complex tectonic regions as the

petroleum industry focuses on further exploration and development of economically important carbonate reservoirs.

KEY WORDS: carbonate systems, SE Asia, tectonics, faulting, hydrocarbon reservoir, Cenozoic, coral reefs, carbonate platforms & buildups

INTRODUCTION

SE Asia is renowned as a region of complex tectonics (Hamilton,1979; Hall, 1996, 2002), extensive reef development (Fulthorpe andSchlanger, 1989; Tomascik et al., 1997; Wilson, 2002), and significanteconomic hydrocarbon reserves (Howes, 1997; McCabe et al., 2000;Doust and Noble, 2008). This is the first work to review the influenceof tectonics, from a plate tectonic to fracture scale, on the initiation,development, demise, and reservoir potential of the region’s Cenozoiccarbonate systems.

Around half of Indonesia’s (Park et al., 1995), and indeed the world’s(Dickey, 1985), hydrocarbon production is from carbonate reservoirs.Ultimately recoverable reserves within SE Asian carbonates areestimated to be in excess of 20 BBOE1 (Howes, 1997). Many regionalreserve estimates are based on those in the Petroconsultants, 1996,database, including those of Howes (1997) and McCabe et al. (2000).Remaining recoverable reserves in Oligo-Miocene carbonates inIndonesia are very conservatively estimated at 1.5 BBO and ; 64TCFG on the basis of only large or giant fields2 (Netherwood, 2002).Estimates of proven oil reserves in a variety of lithologies include 4.3BBO oil (Oil and Gas Journal, 2007) and 3.8 BBO proven oil reservesand 112.5 TCFG (totalling 19 BBOE, Indonesian Government, 2008;Morgan, personal communication, 2009). There is growing literatureon the sedimentology and reservoir development of individualcarbonate formations, particularly for economic subsurface discoveries

(Grotsch and Mercadier, 1999; Bachtel et al., 2004; Vahrenkamp et al.,2004). However, many areas remain understudied in a region that islarger than Europe. With a number of major recent discoveries incarbonates (e.g., the Ngimbang and Kujung Formations of Java) thereis considerable impetus to understand regional carbonate evolution andreservoir development.

SE Asia has been arguably one of the most tectonically activeregions in the world throughout the Cenozoic (Hall, 1996, 2002). Asdocumented below, tectonics influences sedimentation on regional,basinal, formational, and grain scales. Regional syntheses documentCenozoic (Wilson, 2002) and Miocene (Fulthorpe and Schlanger,1989) carbonate development and touch upon their tectonic setting.Palaeoclimatic controls on reservoir quality of Miocene carbonates inSE Asia and the Middle East were compared by Sun and Esteban(1994). With extensive and long-lived carbonate formation (Wilson,2002) SE Asia is an ideal natural laboratory to evaluate the influence oftectonics, at all scales, on carbonate and reservoir development. Twosister publications complement this manuscript: the first evaluatesglobal and regional controls on SE Asian carbonate development(Wilson, 2008), and the second reviews their diagenesis and reservoirquality (Wilson, submitted to AAPG).

Shallow marine carbonate deposits are formed through a combina-tion of biological, chemical, and physical processes, with theirproduction highly responsive to environmental change. Tectonicsmay directly influence these systems through plate tectonic movement,differential subsidence and faulting, and indirectly through itsinfluences on a variety of processes including uplift, climate, runoff,and oceanography. The response of many individual carbonateformations to tectonic activity has been evaluated in Europe(Gawthorpe et al., 1994; Pickard et al., 1994; Rosales et al., 1994),

1BBOE – billion barrels of oil equivalent: 1 BOE¼1 barrel oil or condensate of 6

MCF gas at standard conditions. BBOE is based on energy, not subsurface

volume, equivalency (from Howes, 1997).2Large and giant fields – . 1 TCFG, . 80 MMBO (Netherwood, 2002)

Cenozoic Carbonate Systems of AustralasiaSEPM Special Publication No. 95 Copyright � 2010SEPM (Society for Sedimentary Geology), ISBN 978-1-56576-302-9, p. 13–40.

the Middle East (Burchette, 1988; Cross et al., 1998) and Australasia(Davies et al., 1989; Wilson et al., 2000). Models of syntectoniccarbonate platform sedimentation are being developed for a range ofdifferent tectonic settings (Bosence, 2005), including extensional(Gawthorpe et al., 1994; Bosence et al., 1998), convergent (Dorobek,1995), and volcanically active (Soja, 1996; Dorobek, 2008). Forwardcomputer modelling is helping to evaluate the possible responses ofcarbonate systems to tectonics (Bosence et al., 1998; Wilson et al.,2000). Although a number of these studies consider the implicationsfor reservoir development, none have assessed how carbonate reservoirdevelopment in complex regions may be influenced by tectonics. Thisstudy of SE Asia will help in the prediction of reservoir quality as thepetroleum industry focuses on further exploration and development ofeconomically important carbonates in tectonically active regions.

METHODOLOGY

Cenozoic carbonate development in SE Asia has been reviewed byWilson (2002, 2008). The setting, age, lithologies, biota, diagenesis,economic potential, and controls on development of all known (; 300)individual carbonate formations or units were detailed. Data werecompiled from the literature and the first author’s independent researchon ; 15% of these. The carbonates of SE Asia, particularly surfaceoutcrops without hydrocarbon potential, remain understudied. Forexample, the biofacies of only around 10% of shallow carbonateformations have been documented in detail, and geochemical datacollection is limited (Wilson, 2008). Despite limitations, regional andlong-term trends are apparent (Wilson, 2008). The tectonic contextleading to the initiation, development, and demise of just the 250shallow-water or shelfal carbonates (likely formed in ; 200 m waterdepth or less) and their potential as hydrocarbon reservoirs (Appendix1) are reviewed. Bathyal, metamorphosed, or modern carbonate unitstabulated in Wilson (2002) are not considered here. A possibleexception is the hydrocarbon-bearing Klitik Formation of NE Java,which is rich in planktonic foraminifera that may have accumulated at150 - 250 m (Triyana et al., 2007) or 250 - 1000 m water depth (Schilleret al., 1994). For references on individual formations see Wilson (2002,2008) and references given therein, together with a review of Neogenecarbonates by Fulthorpe and Schlanger (1989). Data on hydrocarbonaccumulations in carbonate reservoirs (Table 1) are mostly from Howes(1997) and updated from subsequent literature or personal communi-cations. More recent regional reserve assessments (McCabe et al.,2000) contain less detail on individual petroleum systems and rely onthe same 1996 Petroconsultants database as Howes (1997). Thetectonic setting is mainly after Hall (1996, 2002) with basin settingafter Petroconsultants (1991). Definitions of key terms used here aregiven in table 2. Backarc basins are here defined only with reference totheir location relative to volcanic arcs. Rifted settings encompass riftedmargins, passive continental margins, rifted microcontinental blocks,and extensional basins.

PLATE TECTONIC CONTEXT ANDCARBONATE DEVELOPMENT

Throughout the Cenozoic, SE Asia has been region of complextectonic activity (Hamilton, 1979; Daly et al., 1991; Lee and Lawver,1995; Hall, 1996, 2002) and extensive shallow marine carbonatedevelopment (Fulthorpe and Schlanger, 1989; Wilson, 2002, 2008).Here the Indo-Australian and Philippine–Pacific plates, and a largenumber of smaller microcontinental and oceanic fragments, interactand collide with Sundaland, the stable eastern margin of the SE Asiancontinent (Fig. 1). Wilson and Rosen (1998) mapped variations incarbonate development onto plate-tectonic reconstructions of Hall(1996, 2002), and a fuller discussion of the main spatial and temporaltrends shown in Figures 2 and 3 is given in Wilson (2008).

Paleocene and Early Eocene carbonate deposits are rare in SE Asia.However, by the Late Eocene there were many extensive carbonateplatforms on microcontinental blocks in eastern SE Asia or along themargins of newly formed marine extensional basins bordering easternSundaland (such as the East Java Sea and Makassar Straits). During theEarly Oligocene extensive platforms formed in New Guinea, as theAustralian continent and associated microcontinental blocks movednorthwards, and also along the margins of the developing extensionalSouth China Sea Basin (Fulthorpe and Schlanger, 1989). Incomparison, carbonates were much less extensive in western SE Asiawhere a major land area extended from mainland Asia, throughSumatra and Borneo during the Eocene and Oligocene. Shelfal orlocalized, and often transient, carbonate deposits accumulated only onthe narrow shelves when clastic input was insufficient to hinderproduction. Many of the Paleogene carbonates are dominated by largerbenthic foraminifera, with corals becoming important contributorsonly in the later part of the Oligocene (Wilson, 2008). Tectonicsubsidence of backarc areas north of Java and Sumatra resulted inmarine flooding, allowing carbonate development during the latestOligocene into the Early Miocene. The Early Miocene was a majorphase of carbonate deposition both in SE Asia (Wilson and Rosen,1998; Wilson, 2008), and throughout much of the tropics andsubtropics, with reef corals extending into higher latitudes than today(Fulthorpe and Schlanger, 1989). Carbonate deposition was commonin marine basins around the margins of mainland SE Asia. Carbonateproduction still occurred on microcontinental blocks in eastern SEAsia, although more islands were emerging due to collision-relateduplift. During the mid-Miocene, the area of carbonate deposition,though still extensive and diverse, had been reduced, due to theemergence of more land, resulting in part from microcontinentalcollisions and the associated shedding of clastic material into adjacentmarine areas. This trend of reduced areal extent but broad regionaldistribution of biological diverse carbonate production continues to thepresent day (Wilson, 2008).

Discussion: Plate-Tectonic Context and Carbonate Development -Regional tectonism via plate movements, extensional basin formation,and uplift was the dominant control on the location of carbonatesduring the Cenozoic in SE Asia (Fulthorpe and Schlanger, 1989;Wilson, 2002). Locally, the creation of faulted highs, volcanicedifices, microcontinental blocks, and basins trapping siliciclasticsdetermined where carbonates began to form. The extent of large-scaleplatforms, increasing into the Miocene then decreasing (Fig. 3), isrelated to the plate tectonic movement of large-scale shallow-waterareas into the tropics, plus submergence during extension, andsubsequent subaerial exposure (Wilson, 2008). Marine flooding dueto tectonic subsidence (particularly of backarc basins on the SundaShelf) may be partially responsible for the increase in carbonateabundance around the Oligocene–Miocene boundary (Figure 3).However, local tectonics cannot be the cause of the major change inbiota around the Oligocene–Miocene boundary. Regional tectonicsmay help partially explain the paucity of corals during the Paleogenein SE Asia, since the tectonic context resulted in geographicalisolation (distances of a few thousand kilometers) from other coral-rich areas such as India or the Pacific Islands (Wilson and Rosen,1998). However, additional environmental factors, such as climate andoceanographic changes, are likely since corals were present in thePaleogene but did not become dominant contributors until around theOligocene–Miocene boundary (Wilson, 2008). A fuller analysis offactors influencing temporal trends during the Cenozoic is given inWilson (2008).

CARBONATE INITIATION

Carbonate units (n ¼ 250) were categorized into those initiated onantecedent basement topography (21%), on volcanic edifices (33%),

14 MOYRA E.J. WILSON AND ROBERT HALL

around emergent islands (of non volcanic origin, 24%) and withinmarine siliciclastic strata (11%). The initiation feature was unknownfor 11% of formations. Definitions for these categories are given inTable 2, and the data are plotted graphically in Figure 4. The majority

of carbonate units developed as attached features (69%), including allthose initiated on volcanic edifices or islands. Eighteen percent of thecarbonates were isolated from significant siliciclastic input andsurrounded by deeper water. Out of these, almost all developed over

TABLE 1.—Hydrocarbon accumulations reservoired in SE Asian carbonates (after Howes, 1997; Petroconsultants, 1996). Data include estimatesfor reserves from recent discoveries (such as those in the Njimbang and Kujung Formations, East Java; Satyana and Djumlati; 2003), but it is

unclear if these figures are directly equivalent to those in the rest of the table. EURR¼ estimated ultimate recoverable resources from fielddiscovered to date.

Area Formation

Tectonic

Setting Age

EURR

106 BOE

Liquids

%EURR

In place

106 BOE

Number

Accummulations Giants

Sumatra Arun Backarc E-M Miocene dSumatra Cunda Backarc L Olig – E Mio. j3,500 30 7,500 . 10

Sumatra Peutu Backarc E-M Miocene bSumatra Malacca

Lst. Mem.

Backarc E-M Miocene 350 10 600 10

Sumatra/Java Batu Raja Backarc lE-M Miocene .850 90 4,300 50

Sumatra/Java Batu Raja Forearc lE-M Miocene ,100 0 300 . 20

Java Parigi Backarc Mainly L Miocene dJava Pre-Parigi Backarc eM-L Miocene j 200 0 300 . 20

Java Mid-Main Backarc eM Miocene bJava Klitik Backarc L Miocene

- Pliocene

300 0 400 3

Java Ngimbang Backarc L Eocene Minor

Java Prupuh/Rancak Backarc E-M Miocene 250, But reserves 50 700 20

Java Kujung Backarc Oligocene

- E Miocene

. 1,010 Preliminary

release little data

from individual

discoveries: Cepu,

Bukit Tua etc.

15 18,000, unclear

if possible,

probable or

proven reserves

45

Borneo Balam-bangan Rift margin L Miocene

– Pliocene

Shows

Borneo Berai Rift margin/

Backarc

L Oligocene 200 10 350 1

Borneo Luconia Rift margin M Miocene

(mostly

L Miocene

on Howes)

6,400 10 10,300 31 6

Borneo Terumbu

(includes

Natuna)

Rift margin Mostly M

– L Miocene

8,000 0 11,000 7 1

Borneo Seilor Rift margin L Eocene

– E Miocene

Shows

Sulawesi Tacipi Intra-arc M Miocene

– Pliocene

, 100 50 , 100 4

Sulawesi Tomori Rifted/ Foreland E-eM Miocene

Sulawesi Salodik Rifted/ Foreland E-M Miocene , 100 50 , 100 5

Philippines Nido Rift margin E Oligocene

– mostly

E Miocene

1,400 30 3,000 25 1

‘Philippines’ Liuhua Rift margin E Miocene 800 (AAPG 1.3) 0 1,100 5 1

New Guinea Darai/Puri Rifted margin L Oligocene

– M Miocene

170 0 250 3

New Guinea Kais Rifted margin/

Foreland

E-L Miocene 500 80 1,750 40

New Guinea Sekau Rifted margin/

Foreland

E-M Miocene Minor production

New Guinea Waripi Passive/Rift? ?Cret. Eocene ?Possible reservoir

TECTONIC INFLUENCES ON SE ASIAN CARBONATE SYSTEMS AND THEIR RESERVOIR DEVELOPMENT 15

isolated, antecedent basement topographic highs, with a few (, 1 of18%) initiating over topographic highs within marine clasticsuccessions. Many of the antecedent highs over which carbonatesform are reported to be fault controlled (Fulthorpe and Schlanger,

1989; Grotsch and Mercadier, 1999; Bachtel et al., 2004). Thisincludes nearly two thirds of those on isolated highs (11 of 17%) andaround a third of those on attached antecedent topography (1 of 3%;Fig. 4).

FIGURE 1.—Plate-tectonic map of SE Asia showing the classification of present-day basins (after Petroconsultants, 1991, and Hall, 2002). The

tectonic setting of some basins remains controversial.

FIGURE 2.—Distribution of carbonate facies on simplified A) Late Eocene and B) Early Miocene palaeogeographic time slices of Hall (1996,

2002) after Wilson and Rosen (1998) and Wilson (2008).


Although carbonate deposits developed over antecedent topographymake up just under a quarter of the total by formation (or units), theycontain most of the hydrocarbons discovered so far. Of the totalnumber of formations, ; 10% contain hydrocarbons, with mostdiscoveries found in carbonates developed over antecedent topography.In particular, isolated carbonates with around two thirds formed onfaulted highs make up the majority of discoveries (8%). A further 3.5%of the total formations have hydrocarbon discoveries, with two of thesefrom attached basement highs, one from isolated carbonates in marinesiliciclastics, and 0.5 formed on attached volcanic edifices (Fig. 4).Looking at this another way, of the 26 carbonate formations withhydrocarbon discoveries, 90% developed over topographic highs, 7%within marine strata, and 3% around volcanic edifices (Fig. 4). Isolatedcarbonates contain 83% (by formation) of economic discoveries, andthis includes all those within marine siliciclastics and most of thoseformed over antecedent topography.

Discussion: Carbonate Initiation – The analysis shows thatcarbonates initiated in a variety of settings, with the majority formedas attached features, probably reflecting the distribution of shallowhabitable areas. Although excessive clastic influx can be detrimental tocarbonate production, recent studies have shown that many carbonateproducers can adapt to a significant influx (Wilson and Lokier, 2002;Sanders and Baron-Szabo, 2005; Hallock, 2005; Wilson, 2005; Lokieret al., 2009). With 58% of the formation development around small-scale islands (of volcanic or non volcanic origins, generally , 20 km in

diameter) rather than around large-scale landmasses (11%), this isprobably a reflection of more limited or periodic influx from smallerislands.

Despite most carbonate units forming as attached features, thedistribution of known carbonate reservoirs is heavily skewed towardsisolated features. The majority of known reservoirs also formed overexisting topographic features (93%), with two thirds of these faultcontrolled. Likely reasons for this distribution include the following.(1) There are many potential stratigraphic traps in carbonate stratadeveloped over highs. Since production is highest in shallow-waterareas (Jones and Desrochers, 1992) ‘‘buildup’’ morphology isamplified through development on a high. If reservoir potential isdeveloped in attached carbonates, there is the possibility of up-dipmigration of hydrocarbons into adjacent clastics. (2) Carbonatesformed on highs, and particularly those that are isolated, are typicallyprotected from clastic influx and develop as clean carbonates.Although there is considerable local variability, clean carbonatesystems often have faster accumulation rates (up to 3000–6000 gm�2 yr�1) than those containing clastics (, 3000 g m�2 yr�1 Woolfeand Larcombe, 1999; Mallela and Perry, 2007; Lokier et al., 2009). InSE Asia, clean carbonates often build long-lived edifices withthicknesses typically 100-3000 m, compared with the few tens ofmeters common for siliciclastic-influenced carbonates (Wilson, 2002,2005, 2008). These clean systems have a greater potential to build tosea level and to experience leaching through subaerial exposure (often

FIGURE 3.—Carbonate facies, hydrocarbon reserves, and numbers of platforms and buildups in SE Asia plotted against regional and global events

during the Cenozoic (after Wilson, 2008, with global events from Zachos et al., 2001; Pagani et al., 2005). Reported ‘‘in place’’ hydrocarbon

reserves for NE Java are based on figures in Satyana and Djumlati (2003) and are shown in a different fill since there may not be direct

equivalence to ‘‘in place’’ reserves for the rest of the region (from Howes, 1997).


TABLE 2.—Definitions of terms used in this paper and basis for categorisation of features. Definitions of tectonic settings are mainly from Allabyand Allaby (1990). Definitions relating to carbonate platforms are from Wilson (1975), Read (1982, 1985), Tucker and Wright (1992), James and

Kendall (1992), and Bosence (2005).

Carbonates: Used here as predominantly marine, mostly shallow carbonates. Stenohaline biota (e.g. corals, larger benthic

foraminifera, echinoderms) are indicative of predominantly marine conditions. Evidence for accumulation in

the photic zone are light-dependent biota (e.g. corals, larger benthic foraminifera or algae) that lack

indications of significant reworking. Other indicators for likely shallow-water origin are close stratigraphic

juxtaposition with terrestrial, coastal or shallow marine clastics (e.g. palaeosols, coals, foreshore or shoreface

sands) or particular sedimentary structures (e.g. swaley- or hummocky-cross stratification, symmetric

ripples).

Carbonate Platform: A general term for a thick sequence of mostly shallow-water carbonates (Tucker & Wright, 1992). This term

covers all the shallow water systems, such as ramps, rimmed shelves and isolated platforms and is

particularly used where a carbonate system cannot be easily assigned to one of these categories (Read, 1982;

James & Kendall, 1992). A carbonate platform includes the depositional systems named above and is a

large edifice formed by the accumulation of sediment in an area of subsidence (James & Kendall, 1992).

Tucker & Wright (1990) noted that carbonate platforms develop in a whole range of settings, but

particularly along passive continental margins, in intracratonic basins to failed rifts and back-arc basins to

foreland basins.

Carbonates initiated on:

Basement high: Antecedent topographic high composed of earlier rock types (basement) with no evidence of near

contemporaneous volcanic origin. If volcanic rocks comprise the topographic high then they will be older

(usually Mesozoic) than the carbonates. No major evidence for non-carbonate rocks forming an emergent

island around which the carbonates developed (other than perhaps just during the very earliest initial

carbonate development). Carbonates develop over the basement high. Basement highs over which the

carbonates form are here categorised as ‘faulted’ when they are shown to be fault-bounded in the published

literature, on seismic sections, or through field mapping.

Volcanic edifice: Carbonates developed on or around volcanic edifices. On at least one side (often all sides) the combined

carbonate-volcanic feature passes laterally into deeper-water deposits. If there is a time gap between volcanic

and carbonate formation this is generally ,5 Myr. Carbonates may interdigitate with, and be partially

contemporaneous with volcanic activity and/or erosion of volcanic material. The volcanic feature may be

subaerially emergent and active or inactive (i.e. an active or dormant volcano).

Island: Carbonates developed around non-carbonate edifices with evidence for contemporaneous or near

contemporaneous emergence. The carbonates often contain reworked clastics and interdigitate with coastal

deposits passing into terrestrial ones. If volcanic rocks make up the island then active volcanism will have

ceased and there will be a significant time gap before carbonate production (.5 Myr). However, most

volcanic deposits unless co-occurring with a range of other rocks, or significantly older (often Mesozoic)

than the carbonates these will have been grouped into the volcanic edifice category above.

Stratal bound: Where the carbonates form stratiform or localised ‘lenses’ in non-carbonate shallow marine successions.

Carbonate strata generally has a thickness of metres to tens of metres thickness, and is less than 200 m

thick. Lateral extensions are tens to hundreds of metres, and may be up to 5 km. Although the non-

carbonates may eventually pass laterally into coastal and terrestrial deposits this does not obviously occur

close to the carbonates (generally ,2 km). Examples of this types of deposits are localised patch reefs

developed on delta-front mouth bars (Wilson, 2005) or carbonate ‘stringers’ within shallow shelf sandstones.

Unknown: Unclear from the published literature or independent research what the carbonate formation is initiated on.

Carbonate development:

Isolated: Isolated shallow-water carbonate accumulation, surrounded by deeper water on all sides. Shallow deposits

generally isolated from non-carbonate runoff (although airfall deposits from distal sources not excluded).

Here, no scale to the carbonate accumulation is implied. This differs from the original definition of an

isolated platform as shallow-water carbonates tens to hundreds of kilometres across, that are surrounded by

deep water (Wilson, 1975; Read, 1982; Tucker & Wright, 1990; James & Kendall, 1992). Here the use of

isolated carbonates would also include smaller-scale carbonate build-ups or patch-reefs surrounded by deep

water which may not have fallen into the original definition of an isolated carbonate platform. The nature of

the carbonate margin is not implied and would include slope angles of 1–2 degrees up to vertical.

Attached: Carbonates accumulate adjacent to non-carbonate edifice and are not surrounded on all sides by deeper water.

The non-carbonate feature may be topographically higher (island or volcano) or have a similar bathymetric

depth to the carbonates (siliciclastic shelf). Siliciclastic shelves may pass laterally into land areas.

Unknown if isolated

or attached:

Unclear from the published literature or independent research whether the carbonates accumulated as isolated

or attached features (as defined above).


repeated). The lack of insoluble clastics also makes for better potentialto develop vugs through leaching (Perry and Taylor, 2006) and lesspotential for complex diagenetic interactions with clays or feldsparsthat may result in cementation (Hendry et al., 1999; Morad et al.,2000). (3) Carbonates formed on highs, particularly those that arefaulted, commonly develop in subsiding basins where there is thepossibility of hydrocarbon generation and subsequent up-dip migrationinto the carbonate edifices. Faults, layered carbonate slope depositsreworked from shallow platform margins, or underlying permeableunits may all act as conduits for hydrocarbon charge. (4) Cleancarbonates, particularly if partially cemented, act as more competentunits than clays or sands and are generally less prone to compactionand dewatering. If there is preferential compaction of surroundingmaterial, then this accentuates development of effective traps in, andcarrier beds adjacent to, carbonate edifices.

SYNTECTONIC CARBONATE DEVELOPMENT

Syntectonic carbonate sedimentation has the following manifesta-tions in SE Asia: (1) fault-margin collapse and resedimentation, (2)fault segmentation of platforms, (3) tilted strata and differential

generation of accommodation space, and (4) modification of internalsequence character, facies, and karst distribution. Among the best-documented syntectonic carbonate platforms showing a range of thesefeatures are the Tonasa Formation, cropping out in Sulawesi (Fig. 5;Wilson and Bosence, 1996; Wilson, 1999, 2000; Wilson et al., 2000)and the subsurface Terumbu (Natuna) carbonates from offshore northBorneo (Fig. 6; Rudolph and Lehmann, 1989; Bachtel et al., 2004).Additional examples of syntectonic carbonate sedimentation in SEAsia (Fulthorpe and Schlanger, 1989; Wilson, 2002) include margincollapse associated with faulting (Luconia; Zampetti et al., 2004), andbackstepping tied to a five-fold increase in subsidence rate (to 50 m/My; Nido; Grotsch and Mercadier, 1999). In Luconia, fault reactivationformed intra-platform graben (subsequently infilled by shallowcarbonates) and influenced the linearity and timing of karst collapse(Vahrenkamp et al., 2004).

The Eocene to Early Miocene Tonasa Formation began as a broadcarbonate platform that was segmented by faulting during the LateEocene (Fig. 5; Wilson, 1999). On footwall highs carbonateaccumulation was contemporaneous with fault block rotation, asevidenced by bed thickening down the hanging-wall dipslope andthickening of strata towards the footwall high in the graben (Wilson

TABLE 2.—Continued.

Tectonic setting (mostly from Allaby and Allaby, 1990)

Backarc Basin Zone of thickened sedimentation and extensional tectonics which lies behind an island arc. For SE Asia this

term is used in a purely descriptive sense, i.e. basin location relative to the arc.

Forearc Or arc-trench gap. The region between an oceanic trench and the adjacent volcanic island arc.

Foreland An area on the edge of an orogenic belt; a foreland is usually on the margin of a continent and is underlain by

continental crust. Many forelands are a flexural response to loading during orogeny and also carry a

superficial fold and thrust belt.

Intra/interarc Setting within or between a volcanic arc(s). The main sediments are (turbiditic) volcaniclastics derived from

the volcanic arc.

Rifted setting Extensional fault-bounded margin involving crustal thinning. Includes passive margins, rift margin basins and

margins of rifted microcontinental blocks.

FIGURE 4.—Pie charts showing data on the initiation of carbonate formations in SE Asia. A) Feature over which shallow marine carbonate

formations initially developed. B) Initial feature over which carbonate reservoirs (by formation) developed. Where the initiation of an

individual formation overlapped into two categories, or the setting changed over time, both settings were counted.


FIGURE 5.—Example of the effects of tectonics on development of the Tonasa Formation, Sulawesi (after Wilson et al., 2000). Block diagram (upper) shows N–S section through large-

scale tiltblock carbonate platform. Lower WNW–ESE cross section is through an area of complex block faulting. Inset photographs (lower right) show coarse breccias shed from the

northern faulted platform margin. Close-up image (right) shows the variety of clast types, including those from the underlying metamorphic basement and siliciclastics formations,

as well as shallow-water carbonates derived from the platform. Tectonics influenced platform development through: (0) location of faulted antecedent topography controlling the

location of carbonate initiation, (1) fault segmentation of platform, (2) localized drowning in regions of high hanging-wall subsidence, (3) resedimentation due to faulted-margin

collapse, (4) tilted strata and differential generation of accommodation space, and (5) influences on location of subaerial emergence (footwall highs) and distribution of facies.

Numbers 1–5 relate to events during carbonate deposition.

20

MO

YR

AE

.J.W

ILS

ON

AN

DR

OB

ER

TH

AL

L

FIGURE 6.—Example of syntectonic carbonate sedimentation from the Segitiga Platform (Terumbu Formation; after Bachtel et al., 2004). The

diagrams are: A) seismic example across the NW part of the platform margin, B) simplified schematic section showing development of the

platform, and C) histogram illustrating the timing and abundance of faults for color-picked seismic horizons. Tectonics influenced platform

development through: (0) faulted antecedent palaeotopography controlling the location of carbonate initiation, (1) a decrease in fault activity

resulting in progradation and platform coalescence, (2) the location of faulting partially controlling facies distribution and the location to which

platforms backstep, (3) local rapid differential subsidence causing sequence variation, and (4) increased tectonic subsidence resulting in

terminal drowning. Numbers 1–4 relate to events during carbonate development.


1999; Wilson et al., 2000). Punctuated tectonic activity on the faultedmargin resulted in at least two phases of large-scale resedimentationfrom the footwall high with distinct wedge-shaped sedimentarypackages accumulating in the hanging-wall graben (Wilson andBosence, 1996). Resedimented deposits derived from faulted footwallhighs extend up to tens of kilometers into adjacent graben, contain upto 5% intergranular porosity, and are interbedded with basinal shales.Only the uplifted crests of footwall highs were affected by subaerialexposure, and were sites of non deposition or ‘‘condensed’’ shallowcarbonate accumulation (Wilson et al., 2000). Elsewhere the footwall-high shallow facies belts were aggradational and parallel the majorplatform-margin bounding faults. Primary intergranular porosity (15–20%) was best developed (prior to burial diagenesis) in the current-swept central aggradational facies belt, which was unprotected by anyplatform-margin highs or emergent islands (Wilson and Bosence,1997). In addition to active faulting, tilt-block rotation, and subsidence,other influences on development include the dominant carbonateproducers (larger benthic foraminifera), current directions, andplatform topography (Wilson et al., 2000).

The Miocene–Pliocene Segitiga Platform of Natuna formed on aseries of faulted horst blocks (Fig. 6; Bachtel et al., 2004). Duringinitial carbonate development, active faulting is inferred from thinningover horst structures and thickening into adjacent lows together withfaults terminating in the carbonate succession. Following cessation offaulting, individual platforms expanded laterally and coalesced throughprogradation, influenced by a decrease in fault-induced subsidence.Carbonate deposits accumulated over the horst blocks were most proneto subaerial exposure, due to their topographically high position.Renewed faulting, block rotation, and differential subsidence resultedin development of wedge-shaped strata, backstepping of platformmargins, together with coeval progradational, retrogradational, andaggradational sequence stacking (Bachtel et al., 2004).

Discussion: Syntectonic Carbonate Development – With tectonicsstrongly influencing the overall morphology, facies distribution, andsequence development of well-documented platforms, further studiesare likely to reveal more extensive effects on other platforms. Reservoirquality for the examples described above was directly linked totectonically influenced development of the platforms. On the basis ofcomparisons with the Tonasa Formation, the best reservoir potential insimilar Paleogene systems might be expected in high-energy shallow-water or transported and/or winnowed deposits, some of which mayoccur as facies belts down-dip and parallel to the faulted high.Although resedimented slope lithologies have reservoir potential, up-dip sealing is likely to be an issue due to hydrocarbons leaking alongplatform-margin faults. For the Neogene Segitiga and LuconiaPlatforms, reservoir development was strongly tied to areas thatremained as topographic highs through structuration and carbonateproduction. These highs were sites of preferential and repeatedleaching during relative falls in sea level and, during burial, poresystems may have been affected by further leaching.

TECTONIC SETTING ANDCARBONATE RESERVOIRS

Cenozoic carbonate systems of SE Asia developed in a wide varietyof depositional settings and formed in a range of plate-tectonic settings(Fulthorpe and Schlanger, 1989; Wilson, 2002). Throughout theCenozoic SE Asia has remained a highly dynamic tectonicenvironment (Hall, 2002). Although the overall regime is convergent(with considerable volcanic-arc development), passive, extensional,and obliquely convergent margins are all common, with settings inmany regions evolving. Basins formed at passive continental margins,rifted margins, on microcontinental blocks, in island arcs, backarcs,forearcs, foreland, and strike slip-settings. Wilson (2002) showed that aspectrum of land-attached, isolated and more localized and ephemeral

carbonates developed in all of these settings (Fig. 7) and often variedconsiderably over short lateral distances.

Individual carbonate formations developed extensively in all tectonicsettings in the region with high numbers in intra-arc or inter-arc settingsassociated with volcanism (39%; Fig. 8). Carbonate units are alsocommon in backarc (21%) and rifted (22%) settings. Less common arecarbonates in forearc (6%), foreland (5%), and strike-slip (4%) settings.The tectonic settings of 3% of the formations were unclear.

The tectonic setting of carbonate reservoirs does not closely mirrorthe distribution of carbonate formations. In terms of proven reservoirsin individual formations (total n ¼ 26), backarc (42%) and riftedsettings (39%) are most common (Fig. 8). These are followed byforeland (13%), intra-arc and forearc (together 8%) settings. Ifestimated in-place reserves are compared, the majority are incarbonates in rifted settings (63%), followed by backarc (34%)settings. Significantly lower proportions have been discovered inforeland (2%) settings, with intra-arc and fore-arc reserves togethertotalling only 1%. This weighting will change as reserves are integratedfrom new finds in the backarc carbonates of NE Java, where recentdiscoveries are said to rank among the largest made in Indonesia overthe past 20 years (Ngimbang and Kujung Formations; Johansen, 2003;Carter et al., 2005; Maynard and Morgan, 2005; Cahyono and Burgess,2007; White et al., 2007; Doust and Noble, 2008). In-place reserves inNE Java have been reported at 18 BBOE (Satyana and Djumlati, 2003).However, it is unclear if this figure is possible, probable, or provenreserves and whether direct correlation can be made with the figures ofHowes (1997).

Discussion: Tectonic Setting and Carbonate Reservoirs – Althoughcarbonate formations formed in a wide range of tectonic settings in SEAsia, economic reservoirs (by formation) are predominantly in backarcand rifted settings. It is unlikely that this distribution is a true reflectionof potential reservoir quality development, although many intraarc orforearc carbonates may be affected by volcaniclastic influx andcommonly form as transient features containing insolubles. Similarlystrike-slip and foreland basins are often sites of high sedimentation andprogradation of siliciclastics in which carbonate production may beshort lived. Source-rock distribution and active petroleum kitchensprobably had a greater influence on economic reservoir distributionthan actual reservoir quality. Both the rifted margin and backarc areasare regions of common source-rock accumulations (Fig. 8). These maybe in older basement (from the rifted margins). Ponded lacustrine orcoaly development is common during the synrift phase, and marinesource accumulation is more likely during subsequent sag (Howes,1997; Schiefelbein et al., 1997). Formation of faulted highs duringbackarc or rifted-margin formation, particularly if isolated, arepreferential sites of clean carbonate accumulation. Because theseoften long-lived fault-bounded carbonates form in an overall subsidingbasin system there is the potential for adjacent or underlying sourcerocks to generate hydrocarbons. If subsidence outpaces accumulationand carbonates are covered by impermeable deepwater shales prior tocharge, then effective reservoirs may form.

FRACTURING AND RESERVOIR DEVELOPMENT

Although fracturing has a variable impact on petroleum systems, it isimportant in effective reservoir development in a number of carbonateformations in SE Asia. Well-documented examples include theNgimbang carbonates from offshore NE Java (Kohar, 1985; Siemerset al., 1992), the Nido Field from the Philippines (Longman, 1985), andthe Manusela Formation of Seram (Kemp, 1992; Nilandaroe et al.,2001). Fracturing also contributes to permeability through pore linkagein the Tacipi Formation (Mayall and Cox, 1988). In the Kerenden Fieldof the Berai Limestone, SE Borneo, fractures have allowed the passageof leaching fluids generated during burial, with dissolution enhancingconduit porosity (Saller and Vijaya, 2002). Although much of the


FIGURE 7.—Equatorial carbonate development showing depositional settings and tectonic context (after Wilson, 2002). Stars show the setting of carbonate systems with reservoir quality

listed in Table 1. For the isolated systems, platforms of varying sizes are common on faulted highs in rifted, continental, backarc, and forearc settings, and to illustrate the variety

within these, descriptions do not strictly align with tectonic settings in the far left column. Values for width, length, and thickness of carbonate systems are from: a) Tigapapan (Ali,

1995), b) Batu Raja (Ardila, 1983), c) Batu Raja (Wight and Hardian, 1982), d) Paternoster (Burollet et al., 1986), e) Tonasa (Wilson et al., 2000), Melinau (Adams, 1965), f) Parigi

(Carter and Hutabarat, 1994), g) Darai (Durkee, 1990), h) Batu Putih (Wilson, 2005), and i) Batu Belaq (Van de Weerd and Armin, 1992; Moss and Chambers, 1999).

TE

CT

ON

ICIN

FL

UE

NC

ES

ON

SE

AS

IAN

CA

RB

ON

AT

ES

YS

TE

MS

AN

DT

HE

IRR

ES

ER

VO

IRD

EV

EL

OP

ME

NT

23

fracturing in SE Asia is likely to be tectonic in origin (Siemers et al.,

1992; Grotsch and Mercadier, 1999), some fractures are associated

with karstification (Mayall and Cox, 1988), differential compaction at

platform margins, or hydrofracturing (Longman, 1985).

The Ngimbang Carbonates accumulated as a laterally extensive,

larger benthic-foraminifera-dominated marine platform on an east–

west-trending faulted high to the east of Kangean Island during the

Middle to Late Eocene (Kohar, 1985; Siemers et al., 1992). The matrix

porosity (; 2%) and permeability (, 0.1 md) are low (Siemers et al.,

1992). The measured flow rates of gas at 12 MMCFPD from the West

Kangean-2 well could be accounted for only by the presence of an

effective fracture and linked stylolite system created by burial and

tectonic processes. Several stages of fracturing affected the carbonate

deposits and over half of fractures are nearly vertical. Stylolites may

provide a horizontal permeable link. Fracture frequency is influenced

by lithology, averages ; 60 per meter, and ranges up to 200 per meter,

with highest densities in the non-argillaceous carbonate facies. Early

fractures, particularly those generated during karstification, are

commonly filled with calcite, dolomite, or kaolinite precipitates. It is

the late-stage fracture system, probably developed during Miocene

tectonic inversion, which is locally partly open. Fractures provide an

average of 0.68 porosity units, which represents as much as 35–40% of

the total porosity in the rock. Fractures also contribute at least 0.2 md

of permeability, or 70% of the gross permeability. The West Kangean-2

well is 8 km away from a major platform-bounding fault, and it appears

that a broad zone was affected by fracturing, although this area may

also have been deformed by complex, late strike-slip faulting (Siemers

et al., 1992).

The Lower Miocene Nido B field from offshore Palawan in the

Philippines produced up to 10,000 barrels of oil per day from fractured

FIGURE 8.—A) Location of productive petroleum systems in SE Asia, showing approximate stratigraphic age and recoverable petroleum resources

discovered to date (from Howes, 1997). Pie charts show the tectonic setting of: B) SE Asian carbonate formations, C) carbonate reservoirs (by

formation), and D) their hydrocarbon reserves (in 106 BOEIP – not including reserve estimates from NE Java from Satyana and Djumlati,

2003). BOEIP¼ barrels of oil estimated (see footnote 1 in text) in place (total estimated trapped petroleum discovered to date). Where the

tectonic setting of an individual formation overlapped into two categories, or the setting changed over time, both settings were counted. If the

figures of Satyana and Djumlati were included in part D total in place hydrocarbon reserves in carbonates would be 60050 3 106 BOEIP, with

53% in backarc, 46% rifted margin, 3% in foreland, and 1% in forearc/intra-arc settings, respectively.


proximal forereef talus (Longman, 1985). Although there weremultiple stages of fracturing, the last-phase fractures remain open.Matrix porosity is low (2–3%) with fracture densities highest in theleast argillaceous carbonates. The fractures: (1) are concentrated at thebuildup margin, (2) formed late, after significant burial, (3) are nearlyvertical, (4) show little offset, and (5) form closely spacedanastomosing networks. These observations are inconsistent withtectonic fracturing, where offsets are expected, and hydrofracturing orcompaction is more likely (Longman, 1985). Oriented cores could helpdistinguish fractures formed through differential compaction betweenlimestones and surrounding shales at the platform margin, andhydrofracturing caused by abnormally high fluid pressures such asdue to rapid sediment loading. Hydrofractures form perpendicular tothe platform trend whereas compaction-related fractures parallel theplatform margin (Longman, 1985). In the adjacent Malampaya andCamago buildups, conjugate, nearly vertical fractures trending NNW–SSE and WNW–ESE are inferred to have a tectonic origin generated byNW–SE compressional stress (Grotsch and Mercadier, 1999). Fracturefrequency is greatest in the low-porosity zones such as cementedwindward forereef or protected backreef areas.

Dolomites associated with faulting form known hydrocarbonreservoirs (Kemp, 1992), with an outcrop example from Borneoproviding an analogue (Wilson et al., 2007). The most complete studyof a dolomite play associated with fractures and faults in SE Asia is ofthe Jurassic Manusela Formation on Seram, where over 40 MMBOhave been discovered (Kemp, 1992; Nilandaroe et al., 2001). Herethere is partial to complete replacement of oolitic limestones, withdolomitization post-dating a phase of burial and compaction.Dolomitizing fluids likely used bounding thrusts as conduits to enterand then alter the Manusela Formation. The dolomites have lowerporosity (; 5% intercrystalline and vuggy pores) than the undolomi-tized limestones (. 10% intergranular, moldic, and vuggy porosity).Reservoir quality and hydrocarbon recovery from the ManuselaFormation is reliant on fracturing. Kemp (1992) noted that fracturedensity is lower in the dolomites than in the limestones and thateconomic reserves are likely only in dolomitized horizons where latefractures remain open. More recently, Nilandaroe et al. (2001) revealedthat fractures and brecciation are common in the dolomites but areprone to cataclasis in which rock flour may act as an impermeablebarrier. Onshore Borneo, a strip of the Oligo-Miocene TaballarLimestone 4–8 km wide has been dolomitized where it is juxtaposed byfaulting against Eocene shales (Wilson et al., 2007). Dolomitizingfluids used faults and fractures as conduits to move into and alter thelimestone. The best reservoir quality (12–20% porosity and tens of mdpermeability) is in crystalline idiotopic mosaics of dolomite that havecompletely replaced the limestone 0.5–2 km away from the main faultwhere late stage dolomite cements did not form. Fracturing has hadvariable impact on reservoir quality. In late fractures that remainedopen, permeability is enhanced (tens to hundreds of md). However,brecciation and fault gouges are common along fractures with shearoffsets, resulting in sealing and reduced permeability (Wilson et al.,2007).

Discussion: Fracturing and Reservoir Development – Fracturingmay enhance or reduce reservoir quality, and the relative timing offracturing to cementation, seal development, and hydrocarbonmigration are all critical. On a reservoir scale, fractures that remainopen typically enhance porosity only by 2–3%, but may substantiallyincrease permeability (by hundreds of md) and allow linkage ofpreviously isolated pores. The highest intensity of fracturing was seenin the least argillaceous carbonates (Sapiie et al., 2007) and those withthe lowest porosity (Grotsch and Mercadier, 1999). Thereforefracturing can result in a play type in otherwise impermeable, low-reservoir quality carbonates (Siemers et al., 1992). Fractures act as low-resistance conduits for later fluid flow, with leaching or dolomitizingfluids potentially enhancing reservoir quality, whereas cementing fluids

result in pore occlusion. Although tectonism is a common cause offracturing, karstification, hydrofracturing, and differential compactionmay also be important. Further quantitative studies are required toelucidate the nature, distribution, and impact on reservoir quality ofthese different processes. The impact of tectonic fracturing on many SEAsia carbonates may have been underestimated given the extremelyactive tectonic context and the common occurrence of structuralreactivation (Letouzey et al., 1990; Cloke et al., 1997; Hall, 2002). Inparticular, the margins of many of the carbonates initiated onantecedent topography are known to be fault controlled (; 2/3) withlarge-scale margin collapse and small-scale fracturing both related tofault reactivation (Siemers et al., 1992; Wilson and Bosence, 1996;Grotsch and Mercadier, 1999; Wilson et al., 2000). In the case of majorfaults, there may be a substantial zone (up to 8 km) of associatedfracturing and/or alteration that may be difficult to image seismicallybut may nevertheless influence reservoir quality. Dolomite, with itsoften crystalline growth form and more brittle nature than adepositional limestone, may be more prone to brecciation andcataclasis when exposed to shear offset. The degree of fault sealingand reservoir compartmentalization may therefore increase with ahigher dolomite versus calcium carbonate content and/or increasedfault displacements. Kusumastuti et al (2002) showed the potential topredict dry carbonate buildups offshore Java from seismic data, whereseal integrity was compromised through leakage via crestal faults.

DEMISE OF CARBONATE PLATFORMS

The exact causes of demise of many carbonate platforms in SE Asiaremains largely undocumented. However, tectonic subsidence, locallyin combination with environmental change and/or eustatic sea-levelrise, has terminated production on a number of platforms (Wilson,1999, 2000; Bachtel et al., 2004). Localized foundering occurred whenfault-related subsidence in hanging-wall areas (0.5 m/ky) exceededproduction rates of foraminiferal carbonates (0.2–0.3 m/ky) duringfault segmentation of the Tonasa Platform (Wilson, 1999, 2000;Wilson et al., 2000). Computer modelling of the main Tonasa tilt-blockplatform showed that during faulting the combined effects of regionalsubsidence (0.02 m/ky) and subsidence related to block rotation couldhave caused the observed rapid drowning and backstepping of theramp-type margin on the dip slope of the footwall block (Wilson, 2000;Wilson et al., 2000). Differential tectonic subsidence controlled thelocation and extent of platform margin backstepping as imaged onseismic lines from the Miocene Segitiga Platform, Natuna (Rudolphand Lehmann, 1989; Bachtel et al., 2004). Rapid subsidence incombination with a eustatic sea-level rise at the end of the EarlyPliocene resulted in terminal drowning of this platform. Backsteppingand then drowning of the Miocene Liuhua (China Sea) and Porong(Java Sea) Platforms were related to subsidence, environmentalchange, and/or relative sea-level rise (Erlich et al., 1990; Erlich etal., 1993; Zampetti et al., 2004; Kusumastuti et al., 2002). In theactively subsiding (; 2–5.7 m/ky) foreland setting of the Huon Gulf(New Guinea) drowning of sub-recent (up to 450 ky) carbonateplatforms occurred during continued subsidence at times of rapideustatic sea-level rise (Galewsky et al., 1996; Webster et al., 2004).Closure of the gulf due to tectonic rotation and uplift also influencedcarbonate development through oceanographic and climatic change(Webster et al., 2004).

Discussion: Demise of Carbonate Platforms – Deeper-water shalesform the seal to all discovered carbonate reservoirs in SE Asia. Thecontrols on platform drowning are therefore a key part of petroleumsystems development. The four major causes of platform drowning are:(1) relative sea-level changes (tectonic or eustatic), (2) environmentaldeterioration, (3) oversteepening and self erosion of platform margins,and (4) burial by clastics (Schlager, 1981, 1989, 1998; Schlager andCamber, 1986; Erlich et al., 1990). Any, or a combination, of these


factors could result in demise of platforms in SE Asia, given the activetectonic setting and the common influx of siliciclastics, volcaniclastics,and nutrients (Wilson and Lokier, 2002; Wilson and Vecsei, 2005).Tectonism, through subsidence, fault-related collapse of margins, andblock rotation, is directly involved in the demise of individualplatforms (Wilson, 2000; Zampetti et al., 2003; 2004; Bachtel et al.,2004; Webster et al., 2004). Further research is required on the causesof SE Asian platform foundering. However, uplift, subsequent input ofterrestrial clastics, and volcanic activity indirectly associated withtectonics may also have contributed to platform demise (Erlich et al.,1990; Erlich et al., 1993; Wilson, 2000; Kusumastuti et al., 2002).

Rates of production of modern and Quaternary reefal carbonatesare up to 10 m/ky (Jones and Desrochers, 1992). Unlessenvironmentally stressed these systems can ‘‘keep up’’ with all butthe highest rates of relative sea-level rise due to fault-relatedsubsidence or glacioeustatic fluctuations (Schlager, 1982, 1998).However, SE Asian carbonates are more prone to drowning due totemporal or spatial variations in accumulation rates. Paleogeneforaminiferal carbonates with accumulation rates of 0.2–0.3 m/kywere more likely to drown and less likely to recover or form ‘‘catch-up’’ successions than their Neogene equivalents (0.3–1 m/ky; Wilson,2008). Many Miocene buildups show evidence for repeated subaerialexposure (Epting, 1980; Park et al., 1995; Vahrenkamp et al., 2004),and drowning may result from a lag in production during subsequentflooding associated with tectonically and/or eustatically inducedrelative sea-level rise.

CONCLUSIONS

Tectonics strongly influenced the initiation, development, demise,and reservoir potential of SE Asian carbonates on plate tectonic tofracture scales. Regional tectonics controlled the movement of shallowmarine areas into the tropics, their emergence and disappearance, inturn controlling carbonate formation through processes such asextensional-basin formation, lateral plate-tectonic movement, anduplift. Locally, the creation of faulted highs, volcanic edifices,microcontinental blocks, and basins trapping siliciclastics were allinfluential.

The majority of carbonate units formed as attached features,probably reflecting the distribution of shallow habitable areas.However, the distribution of economic carbonate reservoirs is heavilyskewed towards isolated features, with two thirds of these faultcontrolled. Reasons for the predominance of isolated carbonatereservoirs include: (1) stratigraphic-trap morphology, (2) ‘‘clean’’carbonate systems building to sea level and affected by subaerialexposure, and (3) development in subsiding basins with potential forhydrocarbon generation.

Carbonates are widely distributed in all tectonic settings in SE Asia,with over a third in inter-arc and intra-arc settings. However, themajority of economic carbonate reservoirs are in backarc and rift-margin settings. The reservoir distribution probably reflects thedistribution of source rocks and active petroleum kitchens rather thanactual reservoir potential.

Tectonics strongly influenced the overall morphology, faciesdistribution, and sequence development of a number of well-documented syntectonic platforms. Reservoir quality was indirectlyinfluenced through controls on distribution of facies with good primaryporosity (e.g., high-energy deposits). The development of secondaryporosity was influenced via controls on the location of highs affectedby subaerial leaching. Tectonic subsidence was involved in the demiseof many platforms, particularly those that contain economic hydro-carbon reserves.

Open fractures enhance porosity by only a few percent. However,they may substantially increase permeability and can be sites ofdissolution during the passage of corrosive fluids during the early

stages of hydrocarbon maturation. In contrast, fractures that compro-mise seal integrity, or are associated with the formation of fault gouge,may compartmentalize or have a detrimental effect on reservoirdevelopment.

In summary, most hydrocarbon discoveries in SE Asian carbonateshave been in isolated platforms, developed over antecedent, oftenfaulted, highs in backarc or rifted settings. Although major discoveriescontinue to be made in these play types, other settings do containeconomic finds and remain less explored.

REFERENCES

ADAMS, C.G., 1965, The foraminifera and stratigraphy of the Melinau

Limestone, Sarawak, and its importance in Tertiary correlation: Geological

Society of London, v. 121, p. 283–338.

ALLABY, A., AND ALLABY, M. 1990, The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Earth

Sciences: Oxford, UK, Oxford University Press, 410 p.

ALI, M.Y., 1995, Carbonate cement stratigraphy and timing of diagenesis in a

Miocene mixed carbonate–clastic sequence, offshore Sabah, Malaysia:

constraints from cathodoluminescence, geochemistry, and isotope studies:

Sedimentary Geology, v. 99, p. 191–214.

ARDILA, L.E., 1983, The Krisna High: Its Geologic setting and related

hydrocarbon accumulations: SEAPEX, Offshore South East Asia Confer-

ence, Proceedings VI, p. 10–23.

BACHTEL, S.L., KISSLING, R.D., MARTONO, D., RAHARDJANTO, S.P., DUNN, P.A., AND

MACDONALD, B.A., 2004, Seismic stratigraphic evolution of the Miocene–

Pliocene Segitiga Platform, East Natuna Sea, Indonesia: the origin, growth,

and demise of an isolated carbonate platform, in Eberli, G.P., Masafero, J.L.,

and Sarg, J.F., eds., Seismic Imaging of Carbonate Reservoirs and Systems:

American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Memoir 81, p. 291–308.

BOSENCE, D.W.J., 2005, A genetic classification of carbonate platforms based on

their basinal and tectonic settings in the Cenozoic: Sedimentary Geology, v.

175, p. 49–72.

BOSENCE, D.W.J., CROSS, N.E., AND HARDY, S., 1998, Architecture and

depositional sequences of Tertiary fault-block carbonate platforms; an

analysis from outcrop (Miocene, Gulf of Suez) and computer modelling:

Marine and Petroleum Geology, v. 15, p. 203–221.

BURCHETTE, T.P., 1988, Tectonic control on carbonate platform facies

distribution and sequence development: Miocene, Gulf of Suez: Sedimentary

Geology, v. 59, p. 179–204.

BUROLLET, P.F., BOICHARD, R., LAMBERT, B., AND VILLAIN, J.M., 1986, The Pater

Noster Carbonate Platform: Indonesian Petroleum Association, 15th Annual

Convention Proceedings, p. 155–169.

CAHYONO, A.B., AND BURGESS, C.F., 2007, Cepu 3-D seismic variations in Oligo-

Miocene carbonate buildup morphology: Indonesian Petroleum Association,

31st Annual Convention Proceedings, p. 122–128.

CARTER, D., AND HUTABARAT, M., 1994, The geometry and seismic character of

mid–late Miocene carbonate sequences, SS area, offshore northwest Java:

Indonesian Petroleum Association, 23rd Annual Convention Proceedings, p.

323–338.

CARTER, D.C., BIRDUS, S., MANDHIRI, D., BRADFIELD, J.P., PARK, R.K., IRIAWAN, A.,

ASJHARI, I., NASFIAH, M., BASYUNI, S., AND AGUNG NUGROHO, M.A., 2005,

Interpretation methods in the exploration of Oligocene–Miocene carbonate

reservoirs, offshore Northwest Madura, Indonesia: Indonesian Petroleum

Association, 30th Annual Convention Proceedings, p. 179–215.

CLOKE, I.R., MOSS, S.J., AND CRAIG, J., 1997, The influence of basement

reactivation on the extensional and inversional history of the Kutai Basin,

Eastern Kalimantan: Geological Society of London Journal: v. 154, p. 157–

161.

CROSS, N.E., PURSER, B.H., AND BOSENCE, D.W.J., 1998, The tectono-

sedimentary evolution of a rift margin carbonate platform: Abu Shaar, Gulf

of Suez, Egypt. in Sedimentation and Tectonics of Rift Basins: Red Sea-Gulf

of Aden: Purser, B.H., and Bosence, D.W.J., eds., London, Chapman & Hall,

p. 271–295.

DALY, M.C., COOPER, M.A., WILSON, I., SMITH, D.G., AND HOOPER, B.G.D., 1991,

Cenozoic plate tectonics and basin evolution in Indonesia: Marine and

Petroleum Geology, v. 8, p. 2–21.

DAVIES, P.J., SYMONDS, P.A., FEARY, D.A., AND PIGRAM, C.J., 1989, The evolution


of the carbonate platforms of northwestern Australia, in Crevello, P.D.,

Wilson, J.L., Sarg, J.F., and Read, J.F., eds., Controls on Carbonate Platform

and Basin Development: SEPM, Special Publication 44, p. 233–258.

DICKEY, P.A., 1985, Petroleum Development Geology: Tulsa, USA, Penwell

Publishing Company, 530 p.

DURKEE, E.F., 1990, Pasca–Pandora reef exploration in the Gulf of Papua. in

Carman, G.J., and Carman, Z., Eds., Petroleum Exploration in Papua New

Guinea: 1st Papua New Guinea Petroleum Convention, Port Moresby,

Proceedings, p. 567–579.

DOROBEK, S., 1995, Synorogenic carbonate platforms and reefs in foreland

basins: controls on stratigraphic evolution and platform/reef morphology. in

Dorobek, S., and Ross, G.M., eds., Stratigraphic Evolution of Foreland

Basins: SEPM, Special Publication 52, p. 127–147.

DOROBEK, S.L., 2008, Carbonate platform facies in volcanic-arc settings:

Characteristics and controls on deposition and stratigraphic development, in

Draut, A.E., Clift, P.D., and Scholl, D.W., eds., Formation and Applications of

the Sedimentary Record in Arc Collision Zones: Geological Society of

America, Special Paper 436, p. 55–90.

DOUST, H., AND NOBLE, R.A., 2008, Petroleum systems of Indonesia: Marine and


EPTING, M., 1980, Sedimentology of Miocene carbonate buildups, Central

Luconia, offshore Sarawak: Geological Society of Malaysia, Bulletin 12, p.

17–30.

ERLICH, R.N., BARRETT, S.F., AND BAI JU, G., 1990, Seismic and geologic

characteristics of drowning events on carbonate platforms: American

Association of Petroleum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 74, p. 1523–1537.

ERLICH, R.N., LONGO, A.P., AND HYARE, S., 1993, Response of carbonate

platform margins to drowning: Evidence of environmental collapse, in

Loucks R.G., Sarg, J.F., eds., Carbonate Sequence Stratigraphy: American

Association of Petroleum Geologists, Memoir 57, p. 241–266.

FULTHORPE, C.S., AND SCHLANGER, S.O., 1989, Paleo-oceanographic and tectonic

settings of early Miocene reefs and associated carbonates of offshore

southeast Asia: American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Bulletin, v.

73, p. 729–756.

GALEWSKY, J., SILVER, E.A., GALLUP, C.D., EDWARDS, R.L., AND POTTS, D.C., 1996,

Foredeep tectonics and carbonate platform dynamics in the Huon Gulf, Papua

New Guinea: Geology, v. 24, p. 819–822.

GAWTHORPE, R.L., FRASER, A.J., AND COLLIER, R.E.L., 1994, Sequence

stratigraphy in active extensional basins: implications for the interpretation

of ancient basin-fills: Marine and Petroleum Geology, v. 11, p. 642–658.

GROTSCH, J., AND MERCADIER, C., 1999, Integrated 3-D reservoir modeling based

on 3-D seismic: The Tertiary Malampaya and Camago buildups, offshore

Palawan, Philippines: American Association of Petroleum Geologists,

Bulletin, v. 83, p. 1703–1728.

HALL, R., 1996, Reconstructing Cenozoic SE Asia, in Hall, R., and Blundell,

D.J., eds., Tectonic Evolution of Southeast Asia: Geological Society of

London, Special Publication 106, p. 153–184.

HALL, R., 2002, Cenozoic geological and plate tectonic evolution of SE Asia and

the SW Pacific: computer based reconstructions, models and animations:

Journal of Asian Earth Sciences, v. 20, p. 353–431.

HALLOCK, P., 2005, Global change and modern coral reefs: New opportunities to

understand shallow-water carbonate depositional processes: Sedimentary

Geology, v. 175, p. 19–33.

HAMILTON, W., 1979, Tectonics of the Indonesian region: United States

Geological Survey, Professional Paper 1078, 345 p.

HENDRY, J.P., TABERNER, C., MARSHALL, J.D., PIERRE, C., AND CAREY, P.F., 1999,

Coral reef diagenesis records pore-fluid evolution and paleohydrology of a

siliciclastic basin margin succession (Eocene South Pyrenean foreland basin,

northeastern Spain). Geological Society of America, Bulletin, v. 111, p. 395–

411.

HOWES, J.V.C., 1997, Petroleum resources and petroleum systems of SE Asia,

Australia, Papua New Guinea, and New Zealand, in Howes, J.V.C., and

Noble, R.A., eds., Proceedings of an International Conference on Petroleum

Systems of SE Asia and Australasia, Indonesian Petroleum Association, p.

81–100.

JAMES, N.P., AND KENDALL, A.C., 1992, Introduction to carbonate and evaporite

facies models, in Walker, R.G., and James, N.P., eds., Facies Models,

Response to Sea Level Change. Geological Association of Canada, p. 265–

274.

JOHANSEN, K.B., 2003, Depositional geometries and hydrocarbon potential

within Kujung carbonates along the North Madura Platform, as revealed by

3D and 2D seismic data: Indonesian Petroleum Association, 29th Annual

Convention, Proceedings, p. 138–162.

JONES, B., AND DESROCHERS, A., 1992, Shallow platform carbonates, in Walker,

R.G., and James, N.P., eds., Facies Models, Response to Sea Level Change.

Geological Association of Canada, p. 277–302.

KEMP, G., 1992, The Manusela Formation – An Example of a Jurassic carbonate

unit of the Australian Plate from Seram, Eastern Indonesia, in Siemers, C.T.,

Longman, M.W., Park, R.K., and Kaldi, J.G., eds., Carbonate Rocks and

Reservoirs of Indonesia: A Core Workshop. Indonesian Petroleum Associ-

ation, Core Workshop Notes no. 1, p. 11–1 to 11–41.

KOHAR, A., 1985, Seismic expression of Late Eocene carbonate build-up

features in the JS25 and P. Sepanjang Trend, Kangean Block: Indonesian

Petroleum Association, 14th Annual Convention, Proceedings, p. 437–452.

KUSUMASTUTI, A., VAN RENSBERGEN, P., AND WARREN, J.K., 2002, Seismic

sequence analysis and reservoir potential of drowned Miocene carbonate

platforms in the Madura Strait, East Java, Indonesia: American Association of

Petroleum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 86, p. 213–232.

LEE, T.-Y., AND LAWVER, L.A., 1995, Cenozoic plate reconstruction of Southeast

Asia: Tectonophysics, v. 251, p. 85–138.

LETOUZEY, J., WERNER, P., AND MARTY, A., 1990, Fault reactivation and structural

inversion. Backarc and intraplate compressive deformations. Examples of the

eastern Sunda shelf (Indonesia): Tectonophysics, v. 183, p. 341–362.

LOKIER, S.W., WILSON, M.E.J., AND BURTON, L.M., 2009. Marine biota response

to clastic sediment influx: a quantitative approach: Palaeogeography,

Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, v. 281, p. 25–42.

LONGMAN, M.W., 1985, Fracture porosity in reef talus of a Miocene pinnacle-

reef reservoir, Nido B Field, the Philippines, in Roehl, P.O., and Choquette,

P.W., eds., Carbonate Petroleum Reservoirs: Berlin, Springer-Verlag, p. 547–

561.

MALLELA, J., AND PERRY, C.T., 2007, Calcium carbonate budgets for two coral

reefs affected by different terrestrial runoff regimes, Rio Bueno, Jamaica:

Coral Reefs, v. 26, p. 129–145.

MAYALL, M.J., AND COX, M., 1988, Deposition and diagenesis of Miocene

limestones, Senkang Basin, Sulawesi, Indonesia: Sedimentary Geology, v. 59,

p. 77–92.

MAYNARD, K., AND MORGAN, W.A., 2005, Appraisal of a complex, platform

carbonate, Bukit Tua discovery, Ketapang PSC, East Java Basin, Indonesia:

Indonesian Petroleum Association, 30th Annual Convention, Proceedings, p.

317–330.

MCCABE, P.J., RYDER, R.T., AND BISHOP, M.G., 2000, Region 3 – Asia Pacific

Assessment Summary: in U.S. Geological Survey, World Energy Assessment

Team. U.S World Petroleum Assessment – Description and Results, Chapter

3, p. R3-i – R3–22 and plates.

MORAD, S., KETZER, J.M., AND DE ROS, L.F., 2000, Spatial and temporal

distribution of diagenetic alterations in siliciclastic rocks: implications for

mass transfer in sedimentary basins: Sedimentology, v. 47, p. 95–120.

MOSS, S.J., AND CHAMBERS, J.L.C., 1999, Tertiary facies architecture in the Kutai

Basin, Kalimantan, Indonesia: Journal of Asian Earth Sciences, v. 17, p. 157–

181.

NETHERWOOD, R., 2002, Oligo-Miocene carbonate reservoirs in Indonesia:

Indonesian Petroleum Association, Newsletter, October, p. 17–23.

NILANDAROE, N., MOGG, W., AND BARRACLOUGH, R., 2001, Characteristics of the

fractured carbonate reservoir of the Oseil Field, Seram Island, Indonesia:

Indonesian Petroleum Association, 28th Annual Convention, Proceedings, p.

439–456.

PAGANI, M., ZACHOS, J.C., FREEMAN, K.H., TIPPLE, B., AND BOHATY, S., 2005,

Marked decline in atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations during the

Paleogene: Science, v. 309, p. 600–603.

PARK, R.K., MATTER, A., AND TONKIN, P.C., 1995, Porosity evolution in the Batu

Raja Carbonates of the Sunda Basin – Windows of opportunity: Indonesian

Petroleum Association, 24th Annual Convention, Proceedings, p. 63–184.

PETROCONSULTANTS, 1991, Southeast Asian Tectonics: Unpublished report.

PETROCONSULTANTS, 1996, Petroleum Exploration and Production Database:

Petroconsultants Inc., Houston, USA.


PERRY, C.T., AND TAYLOR, K.G., 2006, Inhibition of dissolution within shallow

water carbonate sediments: impacts of terrigenous sediment input on syn-

depositional carbonate diagenesis: Sedimentology, v. 53, p. 495–513.

PICKARD, N.A.H., REES, J.G., STROGEN, P., SOMERVILLE, I.D., AND JONES, G.L.,

1994, Controls on the evolution and demise of Lower Carboniferous

carbonate platforms, northern margin of the Dublin Basin, Ireland:

Geolological Journal, v. 29, p. 93–117.

READ, J.F., 1982, Carbonate platforms of passive (extensional) continental

margins: types, characteristics and evolution: Tectonophysics, v. 81, p. 195–

212.

READ, J.F., 1985, Carbonate platform facies models: American Association of

Petroleum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 69, p. 1–21.

ROSALES, I., FERNANDEZ-MENDIOLA, P.A., AND GARCIA-MONDEJAR, J., 1994,

Carbonate depositional sequence development on active fault blocks: the

Albian in the Castro Urdiales area, northern Spain: Sedimentology, v. 41, p.

861–882.

RUDOLPH, K.W., AND LEHMANN, P.J., 1989, Platform evolution and sequence

stratigraphy of the Natuna platform, South China Sea, in Crevello, P.D.,

Wilson, J.L., Sarg, J.F., and Read, J.F., eds., Controls on Carbonate Platform

and Basin Development: SEPM, Special Publication 44, p. 353–361.

SALLER, A.H., AND VIJAYA, S., 2002, Depositional and diagenetic history of the

Kerendan carbonate platform, Oligocene, central Kalimantan, Indonesia:

Journal of Petroleum Geology, v. 25, p. 123–150.

SANDERS, D., AND BARON-SZABO, R.C., 2005, Fossil coral assemblages under

sediment input: their characterisitcs and relation to the nutirent input concept:

Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, v. 216, p. 139–181.

SAPIIE, B., ANSHORY, R., SUSILO, S., AND PUTRI, 2007, Relationship between

carbonate fracture distribution and carbonate facies in the Rajamandala

Limestone of West Java region: Indonesian Petroleum Association, 31st

Annual Convention, Proceedings, p. 139–146.

SATYANA, A.W., AND DJUMLATI, M., 2003, Oligo-Miocene carbonates of the East

Java Basin, Indonesia: Facies leading to recent significant discoveries:

American Association of Petroleum Geologists International Conference,

Barcelona, Spain, Extended abstract, 5 p.

SCHIEFELBEIN, C.F., ZUMBERGE, J.E., AND BROWN, S.W., 1997, Petroleum systems

in the Far East, in Howes, J.V.C., and Noble, R.A., eds., Indonesian Petroleum

Association, Proceedings of an International Conference on Petroleum

Systems of SE Asia and Australasia, p. 101–113.

SCHILLER, D.M., SEUBERT, B.W., MUSLIKI, S., AND ABDULLAH, M., 1994, The

reservoir potential of globigerinid sands in Indonesia: Indonesian Petroleum

Association, 23rd Annual Convention, Proceedings, p. 189–212.

SCHLAGER, W., 1981, The paradox of drowned reefs and carbonate platforms:

Geological Society of America, Bulletin, v. 92, p. 197–211.

SCHLAGER, W., 1989, Drowning unconformities on carbonate platforms, in

Crevello, P.D., Wilson, J.L., Sarg, J.F., and Read, J.F., eds., Controls on

Carbonate Platform and Basin Development: SEPM, Special Publication 44,

p. 15–25.

SCHLAGER, W., 1998, Exposure, drowning and sequence boundaries on

carbonate platforms, in Camoin, G.F., and Davies, P.J., eds., Reefs and

Carbonate Platforms in the Pacific and Indian Oceans: International

Association of Sedimentologists, Special Publication 25, p. 3–21.

SCHLAGER, W., AND CAMBER, O., 1986, Submarine slope angles, drowning

unconformities, and self-erosion of limestone escarpments: Geology, v. 14, p.

762–765.

SIEMERS, C.T., DECKELMAN, J.A., BROWN, A.A., AND WEST, E.R., 1992,

Characteristics of the fractured Ngimbang carbonate (Eocene), West

Kangean-2 well, Kangean PSC, East Java Sea, Indonesia, in Siemers, C.T.,

Longman, M.W., Park, R.K., and Kaldi, J.G., eds., Carbonate Rocks and

Reservoirs of Indonesia: Indonesian Petroleum Association, Core Workshop

Notes 1, Ch. 10.

SOJA, C.M., 1996, Island-arc carbonates: characterization and recognition in the

ancient geological record: Earth-Science Reviews, v. 41, p. 31–65.

SUN, S.Q., AND ESTEBAN, M., 1994, Paleoclimatic controls on sedimentation,

diagenesis and reservoir quality: lessons from Miocene carbonates: American

Association of Petroleum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 78, p. 519–543.

TOMASCIK, T., MAH, A.J., NONTJI, A., AND MOOSA, M.K., 1997, The Ecology of

the Indonesian Seas: Oxford, UK, Oxford University Press, 1388 p.

TRIYANA, Y., HARRIS, G.I., BASDEN, W.A., TADIAR, E., AND SHARP, N.C., 2007, The

Maleo Field: An example of the Pliocene Globigerina bioclastic limestone

play in the East Java Basin – Indonesia: Indonesian Petroleum Association,

31st Annual Convention, Proceedings, 17 p.

TUCKER, M.E., AND WRIGHT, V.P., 1990, Carbonate Sedimentology. Oxford, UK,

Blackwell Scientific Publications, 482 p.

VAHRENKAMP, V.C., DAVID, F., DUIJNDAM, P., NEWALL, M., AND CREVELLO, P., 2004,

Growth architecture, faulting, and karstification of a Middle Miocene

carbonate platform, Luconia province, offshore Sarawak, Malaysia, in Eberli,

G.P., Masafero, J.L., and Sarg, J.F., eds., Seismic Imaging of Carbonate

Reservoirs and Systems: American Association of Petroleum Geologists,

Memoir 81, p. 329–350.

VAN DE WEERD, A.A., AND ARMIN, R.A., 1992, Origin and evolution of the

Tertiary hydrocarbon-bearing basins in Kalimantan (Borneo), Indonesia:

American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Bulletin, v. 76, p. 1778–

1803.

WEBSTER, J.M., WALLACE, L., SILVER, E., POTTS, D., BRAGA, J.C., RENEMA, W.,

RIKER-COLEMAN, K., AND GALLUP, C., 2004, Coralgal composition of

drowned carbonate platforms in the Huon Gulf, Papua New Guinea;

implications for lowstand reef development and drowning: Marine Geology,

v. 204, p. 59–89.

WHITE, J.V., DEREWETZKY, A.N., GEARY, G.C., HOHENSEE, V.K., JOHNSTONE, E.M.,

LIU, C., PIERCE, A.C., AND STEVENS, J., 2007, Temporal controls and resulting

variations in Oligo-Miocene carbonates from the East Java Basin, Indonesia:

Examples from the Cepu Basin: Indonesian Petroleum Association, 31st

Annual Convention, Proceedings, p. 106–116.

WIGHT, A.W.R., AND HARDIAN, D., 1982, Importance of diagenesis in carbonate

exploration and production, Lower Batu Raja Carbonates, Krisna Field, Java

Sea: Indonesian Petroleum Association, 11th Annual Convention, Proceed-

ings, p. 211–236.

WILSON, J.L., 1975, Carbonate facies in geologic history: Berlin, Springer-

Verlag, 471 p.

WILSON, M.E.J., 1999, Prerift and synrift sedimentation during early fault

segmentation of a Tertiary carbonate platform, Indonesia: Marine and


WILSON, M.E.J., 2000, Tectonic and volcanic influences on the development and

diachronous termination of a tropical carbonate platform: Journal of

Sedimentary Research, v. 70, p. 310–324.

WILSON, M.E.J., 2002, Cenozoic carbonates in SE Asia: Implications for

equatorial carbonate development: Sedimentary Geology, v. 147, p. 295–428.

WILSON, M.E.J., 2005, Equatorial delta-front patch reef development during the

Neogene, Borneo: Journal of Sedimentary Research, v. 75, p. 116–134.

WILSON, M.E.J., 2008, Global and regional influences on equatorial shallow

marine carbonates during the Cenozoic: Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology,

Palaeoecology, v. 265, p. 262–274.

WILSON, M.E.J., AND BOSENCE, D.W.J., 1996, The Tertiary evolution of South

Sulawesi: A record in redeposited carbonates of the Tonasa Limestone

Formation, in Hall, R., and Blundell, D.J., eds., Tectonic Evolution of SE

Asia: Geological Society of London, Special Publication 106, p. 365–389.

WILSON, M.E.J., AND BOSENCE, D.W.J., 1997, Platform Top and Ramp deposits of

the Tonasa Carbonate Platform, Sulawesi, Indonesia, in Fraser, A.J.,

Matthews, S.J., and Murphy, R.W., eds., Petroleum Geology of SE Asia:

Geological Society of London, Special Publication 126, p. 247–279.

WILSON, M.E.J., AND LOKIER, S.J., 2002, Siliciclastic and volcaniclastic

influences on equatorial carbonates; insights from the Neogene of Indonesia:

Sedimentology, v. 49, p. 583–601.

WILSON, M.E.J., AND ROSEN, B.R.R., 1998, Implications of the paucity of corals

in the Paleogene of SE Asia: plate tectonics or Centre of Origin, in Hall, R.,

and Holloway, J.D., eds., Biogeography and Geological Evolution of SE Asia:

Amsterdam, Netherlands, Backhuys Publishers, p. 165–195.

WILSON, M.E.J., AND VECSEI, A., 2005, The apparent paradox of abundant

foramol facies in low latitudes: their environmental significance and effect on

platform development. Earth-Science Reviews, v. 69, p. 133–168.

WILSON, M.E.J., BOSENCE, D.W.J., AND LIMBONG, A., 2000, Tertiary syntectonic

carbonate platform development in Indonesia: Sedimentology, v. 47, p. 395–

419.

WILSON, M.E.J., EVANS, M.J., OXTOBY, N., SATRIA NAS, D., DONNELLY, T., AND

THIRLWALL, M., 2007, Reservoir quality, textural evolution and origin of fault-


associated dolomites: American Association of Petroleum Geologists,

Bulletin, v. 91, p. 1247–1272.

WOOLFE, K.J., AND LARCOMBE, P., 1999, Terrigenous sedimentation and coral reef

growth: a conceptual framework: Marine Geology, v. 155, p. 331–345.

ZACHOS, J., PAGANI, M., SLOAN, L., THOMAS, E., AND BILLUPS, K. 2001, Trends,

rhythms, and aberrations in global climate 65 Ma to present: Science, v. 292,

p. 686–693.

ZAMPETTI, V., SCHLAGER, W., VAN KONIJNENBURG, J.H., AND EVERTS, A.J., 2003,

Depositional history and origin of porosity in a Miocene carbonate platform

of Central Luconia, offshore Sarawak: Geological Society of Malaysia,

Bulletin, v. 47, p. 139–152.

ZAMPETTI, V., SCHLAGER, W., VAN KONIJNENBURG, J.H., AND EVERTS, A.J., 2004,

Architecture and growth history of a Miocene carbonate platform from 3D

seismic reflection data: Luconia Province, offshore Sarawak, Malaysia:

Marine and Petroleum Geology, v. 21, p. 517–534.


APPENDIX 1.—Tectonic setting, location and age of SE Asian shallow-water carbonate formations (after Wilson, 2002, 2008). The carbonateformations are listed in the same order as given in Wilson (2002), abbreviations after formation names relate to locations on the maps of Wilson(2002), and areas relate to: S, Sumatra; J, Java; B, Borneo; EI, Eastern Indonesia; NG, New Guinea; and P, Philippines. Abbreviations are: BA,backarc; FA, forearc; S, suture; RM, rift setting; IA, intraarc or interarc; AW, accretionary wedge; FoB, foreland basin (for tectonic setting); AT,antecedent topography; F, faulting; VE, volcanic edifice; EI, emergent Island; MS, within marine strata (for initiation); A, attached; and I, isolated

carbonate platforms.

Area Formation Name Location Age

Tectonic

Setting Initiation

Isolated/

Attached

S Arun Limestone (AL). Equiv.

Limestone member of Peutu

Formation etc.

Onshore N. Sumatra, on

Arun or Lho Sukon

high

Early Miocene –Middle

Miocene (Tf1 and poss Te5),

N8 to N5, diachronous

BA AT-F I

S Batu Raja Formation (BR) S. Sumatra and offshore

NW Java,

Late Early to Middle Miocene

(N4-N8). Diachronism of

drowning

BA AT-F/VE I/A

S (Middle Miocene) Carbonate Unit

(MM)

Northern Sibolga Basin,

offshore Sumatra

Middle to ?Late Miocene FA MS A

S (Late Miocene) Carbonate-Clastic

Unit (UM)

Northern Sibolga Basin,

offshore Sumatra

early Late Miocene FA MS A

S Cunda Limestone (CL). Equiv.

Bampo/Peutu

Onshore N. Sumatra on

Cunda High to W. of

Arun High

Late Oligocene to Early

Miocene

BA AT-F I

S Gunung Bala Formation (GB) Batu Islands (Gunung

Bala on Tanahbala)

Early to Middle Pliocene FA EI A

S Gunung Sitoli (GS) Nias Late Pliocene to Pleistocene FA EI A

S Malacca Lst. Member - Belumai

Formation (BF). Equiv. Arun

etc.

Malacca Straits Early to Middle Miocene. 87/

86Sr range 7–23My

BA AT-F I

S Malakoni Formation. (ML)

Equiv. Simatobat Formation

Enggano, Forearc Pliocene to Late Pleistocene FA ? ?

S Lahomie Limestone Member (LL) Nias latest Early Miocene (or Middle

Miocene) to Early Pliocene

(NN5-NN12)

FA ? ?

S Lam Kabue Limestone (LK)

(Seulimeum Formation)

Banda Aceh,, Forearc Plio-Pleistocene FA ? ?

S Nummulites Limestone (not shown

on map as occurs in melange)

Marginal Bengkulu Basin Eocene to Early Oligocene FA ? ?

S Olodano Formation (OL) Nias & Banyak Islands Early to Middle Miocene FA AT ?

S Ombilin Limestone Member

(OF). Equiv Batu Raja

Ombilin Basin, Barisan

Mountains

Late Early to Middle Miocene S ? A

S Peunasu Formation (PF) Peunasu (Banda Aceh) Late Oligocene to Early

Miocene (N1-N4)

? ? A

S Peusangan Limestone / Sigili

Limestone (Member Baro Fm)

(PS). Equiv. Peutu / Arun

Limestone

Offshore N. Sumatra on

Peusangan / Western

High and Sigili Highs

Early to Middle Miocene BA AT-F I

S Peutu Formation Limestone

Member (LP). Equiv. Arun

Lst., W. High Lst., Telaga Lst

& Malacca Lst.

Northern Sumatra,

Takengon, Langsa

Early to Middle Miocene BA AT-F I

S Sibigo Limestone/Ai Manis (SB) Simeulue, Forearc Island Middle Miocene FA AT I

S Simatobat Formation (ST) South Pagai Forearc Island Probably Pleistocene FA EI A

S Tampur Limestone Formation

(TM). Equiv. limestones in

mainly clastic Meucampli

Formation

Northern Sumatra, Langsa

& Medan

Probably Eocene – Early

Oligocene

RM AT A

S Basal Limestone Member (Telisa

Formation) – BT. Equiv.

Ombilin Lst & Batu Raja

Onshore S. Central

Sumatra,

Padangsidempuan &

Lubuksikaping

Late Early Miocene BA AT ?


APPENDIX 1.—Continued.


Tectonic

Setting Initiation

Isolated/

Attached

S Tuangku Beds Equiv. Marl-

Limestone Series/Olodano (OL)

Banyak Islands, Forearc

Islands

Miocene to mid Pliocene? FA AT/EI A

J Batu Raja (BR) or Gantar

Formation or mid. Cibulukan

(Main Carb. B) (Equiv.

Kujung) see Sumatra

ONWJ – Bima Field (see

Sumatra)

Oligocene to Early Miocene BA VE/AT-F A/I

J Bojonglompang Member of

Cimandri Formation (BL).

Equiv. Parigi. Saraweh Fm.?

W. Java, Jampang Middle Miocene IA VE A

J Bojongmanik Limestone Member

(BM)

W. Java, Bogor Early – Middle Miocene IA VE A

J Bulu Formation (BF) Madura & NE Java –

Jatirojo & Rembang

Late Middle Miocene BA VE/EI A

J Campurdarat Formation (CD) SE Java, Blitar,

Tulungayung

Early Miocene to earliest

Middle Miocene (Te5 – Tf1)

FA VE A

J Cibodas Formation (CF) W. Java, Jampang Late Miocene – Late Pliocene IA VE A

J Cipageur Member (CM) of

Bayah Fm.

W.Java, Bayah area Eocene IA? VE A

J Citarate Formation (CT). Equiv.

Rajamandala Fm.

W. Java Bayah area Late Oligocene to earliest

Miocene

IA/FA VE A

J Gamping Beds (Wungkul) (WG)

(Discocyclina Nangulan Beds /

Formation)

S. Central Java – SE of

Jiwo Hills nr. Padasan

Middle to Late Eocene (Ta-Tb) IA VE A

J Limestone Member Halang

Formation (HM)

Central Java –Purwokerta,

Cirebon & Majenang

Miocene (Middle?) BA/IA VE A

J Kerek ‘Limestone’. Not on map,

E-W trend from Semarang

NE Java, C & E Kendeng

Zone

Late Miocene BA VE A

J Kalipucang Limestone (KP).

Equiv. Halang Fm. &

Karangbolong Lst.?

Central Java Majenang &

Karungnunggal

Middle Miocene (Tf1)– same

age as limestone member

Pamutuan Limestone

BA/IA VE A

J Kapung Limestone of Lower

Kalibeng Fm.

NE Java, W.Kendang

Zone

Late Miocene BA VE/MS A

J Klitik Formation (KT) also

named Kalitik, Ngepung,

Selorojo Kalinges Fm or Upper

Kalibeng (including Klitik and

Balanus Lst)

NE Java – Mojokarta Late Miocene – Pliocene (N18 –

N20) Late Pliocene (N20–21)

Kalitik etc.

BA MS I

J Madura Formation (MF) &

Karren Lst. Equiv. Dandar

Fm. GL Fm. and Upper

Cibulukan Fm., Tapak, Kujung

(KJ) & OK Fms.

Madura & offshore NE

Java and Madura

(Late Miocene) – Pliocene.

Offshore Oligocene to

Pliocene.

BA AT-F/MS I/A

J mid-Main Limestone Member

upper /middle (MM)

Cibulukan Fm (Main Carb. B)

ONWJ & SE shelf edge

& Seribu Platform

Early Middle Miocene BA AT-F I/A

J Ngimbang Carbonates (NC) Offshore Kangean,

Sepangan area

Late Eocene mostly, JS53B-1

small shelfal carbonate

buildup until Early Oligocene,

Kangean-2 starts Middle

Eocene

BA/S AT-F I

J Nummulites Limestone (NL) N. Central Java –

Pekalongan

Middle Eocene- Oligocene (at

least in parts – may be

younger)

BA? MS A

J Nyalindung Limestone Member

(NY)

W. Java, Bogor Middle Miocene IA MS A




Tectonic

Setting Initiation

Isolated/

Attached

J Pacalan Member (PN) Menuran

Formation (?)

NE Java – E of Busuki Miocene or Middle Pliocene

(check)

IA MS/VE A

J Paciran Formation (PC)

sometimes grouped with

Madura Fm.

NE Java: Mojokerto &

Jatirojo & Madura

Late Miocene –Pliocene?

(Jatirojo area) (lower part

N17)

BA MS A

J Parigi onshore (PO) (Equiv.

Kelapanunggal, part Kromong

& Jatiluhur)

W. Java, Ardjawinangun,

Tjianjur

Late Miocene (Tf3) or Middle

Miocene (Effendi, 1973)

BA/IA VE A

J Parigi Limestone (PL) Onshore & offshore NW

Java, Sunda Straits

Late Middle Miocene to

Pliocene, mostly Late

Miocene

BA MS I

J Prapatagung Formation (PR) NW Bali Pliocene IA VE A

J Pre-Parigi onshore (Equiv. Upper

Cibulakan, Kromong (K)

W. Java, Ardjawinangun Middle Miocene (Tf2) BA/IA VE A

J Pre-Parigi Limestone Member

(PP) – upper Cibulukan Fm

ONWJ: SE shelf edge,

Seribu Platform & W.

Ardjuna

Early Middle to Late Miocene

Equivalent to Bulu Member,

Gumai (S. Sumatra) &

Jatiluhur

BA AT I

J Prupuh/Rancak Limestone (PU) -

Member Kujung/Cepu Fm.)

NE Java – Tuban &

offshore Kangean &

Madura

Miocene (offshore Early-Middle

Miocene), also Oligocene

Gunung Putih. Upper &

lower Rancak offshore

Kangean (Kujung I Early

Miocene)

BA AT-F I

J Pulau Seribu (PS) Offshore NW Java, off

Jakarta

Holocene BA AT-F? I

J Rajamandala Formation (RF).

Also known as Tagogapu Lst.

& Gunung Masigit Lst.

W Java, Tjiandjur, nr.

Bandung

Late Oligocene – Early Miocene

(Te) (N3-N4) & detrital Lst

(N5-N7) Sukabumi area.

BA/IA AT-F I

J Sakaraja (Sukaraja) Member,

Benteng Formation (SM)

SW Java, Tasikmalaya Late Miocene or younger

(Correlated with Cibodas

Fm.)

FA/IA VE A

J Sampung Formation (S) S. Central / SE Java Late Miocene IA VE A

J Selatan Formation (SF) S Bali Miocene – Pliocene IA VE A

J Sentolo Formation (ST) S. Central Java Early Miocene (N8) FA/IA VE A

J Sigugur Limestone Member

(SLM)

N. Central Java,

Banjarnegara &

Pekalongan

Miocene. Late Oligocene?

(Sujanto & Sumantri)

BA MS

J Limestone member – Tapak

Formation (LM). Equiv.

Kalibuik Lst. Member?

N. Central Java –

Purwokerta &

Majenang

Pliocene BA MS A

J Tawun / Tuban Formation (TB) Madura Early Miocene (N5 – N12) BA MS A

J Tjitalang Limestone Member

(TJ)

W. Java, Tjiandjur &

Bandung

Miocene – Late Pliocene? IA VE/MS A

J Wonocolo Formation (not on

map)

Offshore NE Java Middle to mostly Late Miocene BA MS I

J Wonosari / Punung Formation

(WS). Equiv. Kepek & partly

to Oyo Fm.

S. Central & SE Java Predominantly Early – Middle

Miocene, but possibly into

Pliocene

FA AT-F I

J Wungkal Beds (WG) S. Central Java – W. flank

Jiwo Hills

Early to middle Middle Eocene

(late Ta)

IA VE/MS A

B Balambangan /Tigapapan

Limestone (BT)

Offshore west Sabah Late Miocene to Plio-

Pleistocene

RM/AW MS A

B Batu Belaq (Belah) Limestone

(BQ)

Upper Kutai basin, E

Kalimantan

Oligocene (upper) BA/RM AT-F I




Tectonic

Setting Initiation

Isolated/

Attached

B Batu Gading (BG) Sarawak Late Eocene (Tb) and Late

Oligocene (Te1–4)/ early

Miocene? (Te)

RM/AW ? ?

B Bebulu / Dian / Batu Putih (80–6)

Carbonates (BB)

East Kalimantan and in

offshore area

Oligocene to Late Miocene RM/BA MS A

B Berai (BR) and Tanah Grogot

Limestones

SE Kalimantan Mostly Oligocene, but Late

Eocene to Early Miocene in

Barito Basin. Active

sedimentation on Paternoster

Platform

RM/BA AT-F A&I

B Bukit Sarang Limestone (S)

Nyalau Fm.

Sarawak Oligocene (Tc) RM ? ?

B Gomantong / Kinabatangan

Limestone (GL)

Sabah Late Oligocene to Early

Miocene (Te)

RM MS A

B Kedango/Lebak Limestone (KO) N Kutai margin, E

Kalimantan

Late Eocene (Tb) to Early

Miocene (Te5)

BA/RM AT-F I

B Minor limestone in Labang/

Tanjong Formations (LT)

Sabah Oligocene to Middle Miocene RM MS A

B Luconia (LS) Luconia, offshore

Sarawak

Middle (mostly)-Late Miocene.

Some active carbonate

production to north.

RM AT-F I

B Melinau Limestone (ML) Sarawak Late Eocene (Tb) to Early

Miocene (Te)

RM AT I

B Ritan Limestone member (RT) &

limestone in Batu Kelau

Formation

N Kutai margin, E

Kalimantan

Late Eocene (Tb) BA/RM AT I

B Seilor (SO) and Taballar (TB),

Tende Hantu (TH) &

Domaring (DM) Formations

Mangkalihat Peninsula

and Maratua ridge

Late Eocene (Tb) to Mio-

Pliocene

BA/RM AT-F A&I

B Subis (SB) & Bekuyat (BY)

Limestones

Sarawak Early Miocene (Te5) RM AT I

B Limestone lenses in Tanjung

Formation (Not on map)

SE Kalimantan Late Eocene (to earliest

Oligocene)

RM MS A

B Terumbu Limestone (TL) Offshore NE Natuna Mostly Middle-Late Miocene

(Early Miocene to Early

Pliocene

RM AT-F I

B Vanda Limestone (V) Offshore Tarakan basin,

NE Kalimantan

Early Pliocene RM/BA MS A

EI Anggai Formation (AG) North Obi, Moluccas Pliocene (possibly Late

Miocene)

BA/IA VE A

EI Bedded limestone (BL). Equiv. to

Lst. lenses in Nangapanda Fm.,

E. Flores?

W. Flores, Komodo & E.

Sumbawa, Nusa

Tenggara

Middle Miocene IA VE A

EI Berebere Formation (BB) Morotai, Moluccas Pliocene (poss. some Miocene) BA/IA EI/VE A

EI Buara Formation (BU) Kolaka, SE Sulawesi Pleistocene to Holocene (poss.

Pliocene)

?FoB EI A

EI Cablac Formation (CF). Includes

Aliambata Fm (S. coast)

Timor Early Miocene (Te) RM AT I/A

EI Celebes Molasse Limestone (CM) Palu, W. Sulawesi. Near

Dongalla

?? Middle Miocene BA/FoB/S EI A

EI Central Lombok Block

carbonates (not on map)

90 km N. of Lombok &

Sumbawa

Paleogene to Early Pliocene BA AT-F? I

EI Coral Limestone (CL) N. Arm, Sulawesi Pliocene IA VE A

EI Dartollu Formation (DL) E. Timor Middle and Late Eocene (mostly

Middle Eocene)

RM ? ?




Tectonic

Setting Initiation

Isolated/

Attached

EI Eemoiko Formation (EE) Kolaka, SE Sulawesi Late Miocene to Pliocene. Late

Oligocene to Late Miocene1

FoB? EI A

EI Fluk Formation (FF) South Obi, Moluccas Early - Middle Miocene BA EI A

EI Fufa Beds (not on map) Seram Middle-Late Pleistocene and

Holocene

AW/FoB EI A

EI Kayawat Formation (not on map) Waigeo, Moluccas Late Eocene RM ? ?

EI Makale & Bua Kayu Formations

(MB)

Kalosi area, western

Central Sulawesi

mostly Early to Middle Miocene

(Makale may extend down to

Late Eocene)

BA AT-F I

EI Mandioli Lst Member (not on

map) (of Kaputusan Formation)

Bacan, Moluccas Late Miocene – Early Pliocene BA/IA EI A

EI Pancoran Formation. Equiv.

upper Salodik (SD)

Mangole, Lifumatola

Island & S. Sulabesi

Early to Middle Miocene RM EI A

EI Paumbapa Formation (PF) Sumba. W of Bondobak Oligocene RM ? ?

EI Peleng Formation (PE). Equiv.

Raised reef lst Sulawesi

Banggai Sula, E.

Sulawesi

Pleistocene to Holocene RM EI? A

EI Poh Formation (PO) Batui & Luwuk, East

Arm Sulawesi

Oligocene – Late Miocene FoB ? ?

EI Pusang / Puger Formation (PP) Lombok Miocene IA VE A

EI Rantepao Member of Toraja Fm.

(RN)

Rantepao area, central

Sulawesi

Late Eocene BA EI A

EI Ratotokok Limestone (RT) Manado, Kotamobagu, N.

Sulawesi

Early to Middle Miocene, into

Late Miocene – Kotamobagu

IA VE A

EI Ruta Formation (RF) Bacan, Moluccas Early-Middle Miocene BA/IA VE A

EI Salayar Limestone Member of

Walanae Formation (SL)

South Sulawesi, Salayar

& Bonerate

Late Miocene to Early Pliocene

(N16-N19). Middle Miocene

to Pliocene -Bonerate

S/IA EI/VE A

EI Salodik Formation (SD) Banggai Sula, Batui,

Luwuk, Bungku, East

Arm Sulawesi

Eocene to Middle Miocene

(Batui – Oligocene to Middle

Miocene). Kendari to Late

Miocene

RM/FoB AT I

EI Sampolakosa Formation (SM) Buton, Sulawesi Late Miocene to Late Pliocene

(N17/18 – N21)

RM AT-F I

EI Subaim Formation (SB) Halmahera, Moluccas Miocene, locally Miocene –

Early Pliocene

BA MS ?

EI Tacipi Formation (TC) Eastern South Sulawesi Middle Miocene to earliest

Pliocene

IA VE A/I

EI Tamangil Formation (or member)

(TW)

Kai Besar Middle-Late Oligocene RM AT I

EI Tanpakura Formation (TP) SE Sulawesi Late Eocene – Early Oligocene RM EI A

EI Tapalang Member of Mamuju

Formation (not on map)

Mamuju area, central

Sulawesi

Late Miocene IA VE A

EI Tomori (lower - platform) &

(upper – platform & reefal)

Formations. (not on map)

Equiv. Salodik & Poh Fms.

Tomori, East Arm of

Sulawesi

Eocene – Early Miocene RM/FoB AT-F A

EI Tonasa Formation (TN) Western South Sulawesi Early/Middle Eocene to Middle

Miocene

BA/RM AT-F I

EI Unnamed lst (UL). interbedded

with volcanics

Komodo & Sumbawa Early Miocene IA VE A

EI Viqueqne or Batuputih Fms (BF).

or Lari Guti Lst.

Timor Late Miocene to Pliocene (N9 -

N11), Lari Guti, E. Timor,

Late Miocene

FoB MS A

EI Waigeo Formation (WG) Waigeo & Gebe

Moluccas

Early to Late Miocene (poss-

Pliocene)

IA EI A




Tectonic

Setting Initiation

Isolated/

Attached

EI Waihekang Formation (WF).

Equiv. unnamed lst W. Flores

& Rinca. May be partly equiv.

to Laku Fm. lst. & marl (Alor)

Lomblen, Flores & Ende,

Nusa Tenggara

Late Miocene to Pliocene (N18-

N22)

IA VE A

EI Waikabubak Formation (WK),

Waingapu Formation

Sumba Late Miocene to Pliocene (Early

to Middle Miocene -

Waingapu)

RM MS A

EI Wapulaka Formation (WP) Buton, Sulawesi Late Pliocene to Pleistocene

(N21–22/23)

FoB AT-F I/A

EI Watapatu Formation (WT) Sumba. W of Bondobak Eocene RM AT I?

EI Weduar Formation (TW) Kai Besar Miocene RM ? ?

EI Weryahan Formation (WH) Kai Islands Pliocene RM EI A

EI Wakatin Formation (KT). Equiv.

to Hotong Fm.

Buru (S coast & centre of

island)

Late Miocene. Late Miocene

and Early Miocene ages

recorded for Hotong Fm.

(N4-N8)

RM AT I?

P Alfonso XIII Formation (not on

map)

W. coast Palawan,

Philippines

Pliocene RM EI A

P Lst of Argao Group (AR)

(Bandao Lst or Bulalacao Lst.)

Balatasan Peninsula, S.

Mindoro, Philippines

Bandao (Tc-d). Late Oligocene

or Early Miocene

(Bulalacao)(later ages up to

Pliocene have been given)

RM EI A

P Bagolinao Lst & marl (BG) Tablas Island, Visayas,

Philippines

Middle Miocene (Tf1–2) IA ? ?

P Barili Limestone (BR), equiv.

Dingle Limestone, poss. to

Maingit Lst. Also Licos /

Upper Lst from Licos area,

Cebu may be equiv. to Barili

or Carcar

Widespread in southern &

northern Cebu,

Philippines & in S.

Mindoro

Late Miocene and earliest

Pliocene. Locally 2 (or more)

limestone units, one early

Late Miocene, another base

Pliocene

IA EI A

P Baybay Lst. (BB) equiv. Carcar S. Burias, Visayas Plio-Pleistocene IA VE A

P Baye Limestone (BL) / Lutak Hill

(LH)

Central Cebu, Philippines Middle to Late Eocene ?

P Binabac Limestone. Alpaco

member of Malubog contains

lower & upper Binabac lst (not

on map)

Uling area, central Cebu,

Philippines

Early Miocene BA/IA EI A

P Buga Buga Lst. Equiv. to

Calubian? (CF)

NW Leyte, Philippines Early (?) – Middle Miocene or

Late Miocene to Pliocene

(NN11)

BA/IA EI/MS A

P Bugtong Lst. (Confusion with

Pocanil). Lst of Caguray Fm.

(not on map)

Mindoro, Philippines Eocene (if Pocanil – Early

Miocene). Late Eocene for

Caguray

?

P Butong Limestone. Equiv. Cebu

Limestone (CO)

Southern Cebu,

Philippines

Late Oligocene BA/IA EI/MS A

P Cabariohan Limestone / Tigayon

Lst and ?Pilar Lst. (not on map)

Panay Island, Philippines Oligo-Miocene? BA/IA VE A

P Cabugao Limestone (GC) S Catanduanes Island, SE

Luzon, Philippines

Middle to Late Eocene IA/S VE A

P Calatagan Marl (CT) SW Luzon Middle Miocene – Pliocene?

(Upper X & Y)

IA VE A

P Calicoan Lst. (CL) SE Samar & Calicoan

Island, Philippines

Plio-Pleistocene ? EI A

P Callao Limestone (CA) Cagayan, NE Luzon Middle Miocene (Tertiary lower

X)

IA EI A




Tectonic

Setting Initiation

Isolated/

Attached

P Calubian Formation (CF)

(Calubian Lst. of Leyte

Group)

NW Leyte, Philippines Early (?) - Middle Miocene

(NN5)

IA? VE? ?

P Carbonates of Reed Bank Reed Bank & Dangerous

Grounds, S. China Sea

Late Oligocene to Holocene RM AT-F I

P Carcar Limestone (Tablas) (CC).

Equiv. Pleistocene San

Sebastian Fm. (S. Cebu) or

Calicoan Lst. (Samar)

Widely distributed around

coast of Cebu, Negros,

Bohol, Mindoro,

Philippines

Late Pliocene – Pleistocene, but

may only be Pleistocene

BA/IA EI A

P Cebu Limestone (CO) (Orbitoid

Lst.). Equiv. Camansi Lst. /

Guila-Guila or lower Lst.

Cebu, Batan, Philippines Late Oligocene (Te1–4, NP25)

or poss. Early Miocene

BA/IA VE/EI A

P Culianan Lst. Formation (not on

map)

Zamboanga, Mindanao Middle / Late Miocene ?

P Lst. In Daram Fm. (Not on map) SE Leyte, Daram Island

& S. Samar,

Philippines

Oligo-Miocene IA VE A

P Davao Limestone (DV). Equiv.

limestone in Nabanog

Formation. (Equiv. Madanlog

Fm.)

Davao & northern.

Mindanao

Late Eocene ? VE/EI A

P Dingle (DL) / Manlacbo

Formation or Mountain Lst.

Panay & Guimaras Island,

Philippines

Late Miocene to (?)Pliocene BA EI A

P Diwata Lst, Labuan Lst. Awang

Lst. Tamisan coralline Lst.

(LD) (equiv. Carcar Lst)

Agusan, Zamboanga,

Davao, Mindanao

Pliocene IA EI A

P Guijalo Lst. (GC) Nummulites

Limestone of Payo Formation.

Sula Formation

W. Caramoan Peninsula

(SE Luzon) N. Central

Catanduanes Island, SE

Luzon, Sula (Cagraray)

Philippines

Middle Eocene (upper Lutetian /

lower Bartonian – P12 or

P13. Eocene (Sula)

IA/S VE A

P Hubay Formation. (of Leyte

Group) (HB)

Leyte, Philippines Late Miocene to Pliocene. Buga

Buga (NN11), Hubay (N19)

BA/IA VE/EI A

P Ibulao Limestone (IB) Cagayan Valley, NE

Luzon

Early Miocene (Tertiary upper

W)

EI A

P Isio Limestone (IL) Cauayan area, SW

Negros, Philippines

Eocene ?

P Kantaring Formation (not on

map)

SW Leyte, Philippines. Late Oligocene (?) - Early

Miocene

IA? VE/EI A

P Kitcharao (or Kicharao)

Limestone (not on map)

N Agusan, Mindanao,

Philippines

Early or Middle Miocene IA? ?

P Kennon Limestone (KN) (may be

partly equiv. to Mirador)

N. Central Luzon Middle Miocene (Tertiary lower

X)

EI A

P Libertad Lst. (L) & marl Camotes, Visayas Middle Miocene (Tf2) IA EI A

P Lst. of Liguan Fm/Lst? (LC)

(Coast, Hill, & Vizcaya Lst.

Member), Coal Harbour Lst

Batan Island & Cagraray

Island, SE Luzon,

Early Miocene (Te5) poss. Late

Oligocene (Te4)

IA EI A

P Lower Buyag Formation (may

include two units: Banga &

Malbug members) (not on

map)

Masbate, Philippines. Early (?) - Middle Miocene (N9

– N12)

IA/S VE/EI A

P Lunsuran Lst. (LL)/ Masapelid /

Hagonoy (equiv. Cebu Orbitoid

Lst.) poss. Culianan. Tubod Lst

(Taytay Group)

E. Zamboanga, & N.

Mindanao

Late Oligocene – Early Miocene IA VE A




Tectonic

Setting Initiation

Isolated/

Attached

P Lutak (Hill) Limestone (LH) Cebu, Philippines Middle Oligocene (Td, P21 or

NP23-NP24)

IA VE A

P Magapit Limestone (not on map) Cagayan, NE Luzon Plio-Pleistocene (Tertiary Z) IA EI A

P Maingit (Mainguit) Limestone or

basal Maingit facies of Barili

Formation (BR).

Maingit river, Cebu,

Philippines

Middle or Late Miocene IA EI A

P Makalawang Lst. / San Pascual

(not on map)

NW Burias Island,

Visayas

Oligocene-Early Miocene IA VE A

P Malumbang Limestone (MB)

(Upper & lower)

Tayabas & Bondoc

Peninsula, SE

Luzon

Plio-Pleistocene (Tertiary Z) or

Mio-Pliocene

IA EI A

P Masbate Limestone / Port

Barrera Lst (MS). Equiv.

Carcar Lst.

Masbate, Philippines Originally thought to be Mio-

Pliocene, but may be

Pleistocene (N22)

BA/IA VE/EI A

P Mirador (Mt. Mirador) Lst.

Equiv. Baguio Lst (member of

Bued River Series) (not on

map)

N. Central Luzon, W. of

Baguio City

Miocene (or Plio-Pleistocene) IA/S EI A

P Monacao Lst (ML)., Lsts in

Caracaran & Bilbao (Upper &

lower) Fms. (Upper lst?),

Casolgan

Batan Island, SE Luzon Middle to Late Miocene IA EI A

P Montalban / Binangonan / Angat

Limestone (BN) (of Quezon

Fm.). Also lst in Sibul Fm.-

Equiv. Pagabilo Lst.

SW & Central Luzon

(Rizal, Bulacan,

Laguna)

Early Miocene or Oligo-

Miocene

IA VE A

P Mountain Maid Limestone (MM).

Equiv. Cebu Lst.

Masbate, Philippines Late Oligocene - Early Miocene

(upper Te)

IA VE/EI A

P Mt. Lookout Limestone (TY) Western Tayabas Isthmus,

SE Luzon

Oligo-Miocene (Tertiary W) IA VE A

P Nabua Formation Lst. (TN)

Member

Bicol Peninsula, SE

Luzon

Middle Miocene – Pliocene

(Tertiary upper X – Z)

IA VE/EI A

P Naispit Fm. (not on map) Agusan, Mindanao Mio-Pliocene IA EI A

P Nido Limestone (NL) &

Linapacan Limestone (deeper

water calciturbidites)

Nido B, Malampaya &

Camago Fields,

offshore NW Palawan

Philippines,

Early Oligocene / Early

Miocene

RM AT-F I

P Olutanga Lst. Opol Fm. (LD)

(Equiv. To Carcar) (not on map)

Zamboanga, Oriental

Misamis, Mindanao

Plio-Pleistocene IA EI A

P Oreng Formation (not on map) Mindoro, Philippines (Not

on map)

Late Miocene (Th) - Pliocene ?

P Pagabilo Limestone (TY) /

Sampaloc Lst Conglomerate

(Quezon Fm). Partly equiv. to

Tayabas & Montalban Lst.

Western Tayabas Isthmus,

SE Luzon

Early Miocene (Tertiary upper

W), Sampaloc Lst.

Conglomerate (Early –

Middle Miocene)

IA VE A

P Pasuquin Arenaceous Limestone Ilocos Norte, NW Luzon

(Not on map)

Early Eocene ? EI A

P Pocanil Lst. (PO) Mindoro, Philippines Miocene IA EI A

P Punta Negara & Punta Blanca

Orbitoidal Lst

Ilocos Norte, NW Luzon

(Not on map)

Miocene IA EI A

P Sagada Limestone (not on map) Sagada, Mountain

Province, Luzon (Not

on map)

Mio-Pliocene? IA EI A

P San Isidro Formation (SI). Equiv.

Carcar Lst.

Leyte, Philippines Pleistocene IA/S VE/EI A




Tectonic

Setting Initiation

Isolated/

Attached

P San Juan Limestone (SJ) Camotes, Visayas Upper Miocene – Pliocene IA/BA ? ?

P San Pascual Formation (SP) Burias, Visayas Miocene IA MS A

P Santa Cruz Lst. (CS) Marinduque Middle (?Late) Miocene (Tf1) IA VE A

P Sierra Bullones Limestone (SB).

Equiv. Barili Lst. Cebu

SE Bohol, Sierra

Bullones Range,

Philippines

Late Miocene – Early Pliocene BA/IA MS ?

P Siloay Limestone (not on map) Cotabato, Mindanao Mio-Pliocene IA VE A

P Sorsogon Marls (SS) Bicol Peninsula, SE

Luzon

Plio-Pleistocene (Tertiary Z) IA EI A

P Sto. Domingo Formation (not on

map)

S Catanduanes Island, SE

Luzon, Philippines. Not

on map

Middle to Late Miocene S ? ?

P St. Paul’s Limestone (ST) St. Paul’s Mountain,

Bacuit Bay, Palawan

Middle Miocene? RM AT I

P Talave Limestone (TA) member

of Talave Fm. Equiv. Barili

Fm. of Cebu

East and central Negros,

Philippines

Late Miocene – Early Pliocene BA/IA VE/EI A

P Talisay & Ligao limestones (TN).

Similar to lsts on Batan Islands

Bicol Peninsula, SE

Luzon (Talisay river)

Middle Miocene? (Tertiary

middle X)

IA EI A

P Taluntunan – Tumicob Lst.

Member (not on map)

Marinduque Eocene (Ta-Tb) IA VE A

P Tayabas Limestone (TY)

(member – Tayabas coal

measures)

Tayabas Isthmus, SE

Luzon

Early – Middle Miocene

(Tertiary upper W – lower X)

IA EI A

P Ticao Limestone (TC) Ticao Island, Visayas Middle Miocene (Tf3) IA ? ?

P Torrijos Fm. (TR) (Marlanga Lst.

Member) & overlying Taipan

Fm (Taipan Lst. Member)

Dolores Lst

Marinduque Late Oligocene (Te1–4)-

Dolores, Late Olig – Early

Miocene (Te4–5) – Torrijos &

Taipan

IA VE A

P Trankalan / Binaguiohan

Limestone (TL). Equiv. To

Cebu Limestone on Cebu

Negros, Philippines Late Oligocene - Early Miocene ? AT ?

P Tubigon Lst (not on map) Tubigon, W. Bohol Eocene ?

P Uling (Mt. Uling) Limestone

(MU). Equiv. Lst in Santan

well. Also equiv. Middle Lst. /

Binangonan Lst.

Cebu, Philippines Middle Miocene BA/IA VE/EI A

P Wahig Formation (WH). (Wahig

Orbitoid Lst.) Equiv. Uling Lst,

Cebu

Northern Bohol,

Philippines

Early (?) - Middle Miocene

(NN5)

IA/BA VE/EI A

P Zambales Limestone (ZL) Zambales, W. Central

Luzon

Late Miocene (Tertiary upper X) IA EI A

P Ziujiang/Zhujiang Carbonates

(Liuhua Platform) (not on map)

Pearl River Mouth Basin,

S. China Sea

Early Miocene RM AT-F I

NG Adau Limestone (not on map) Southern Papuan

Mainland, PNG

Lower to Middle Miocene ?IA VE A

NG Lst. in Aibala Volcanics (AB) Yule, Southern PNG Eocene? IA VE A

NG Atkari Formation (AK) Misool, Irian Jaya Plio-Pleistocene RM ? A

NG Baruni Calcarenite (BR) Port Moresby, PNG Paleocene (Ta1) RM/FoB VE A

NG Boera Limestone (BO) / Kido

Limestone

Port Moresby, PNG Late Oligocene to Early

Miocene. Early to Middle

Miocene (Kido)

IA VE A

NG Calcilutite in Sorong Fault

System (C). Equiv. includes

Asbakin Lst.

Sorong, Mar, Irian Jaya Late Miocene to Quaternary S ? ?




Tectonic

Setting Initiation

Isolated/

Attached

NG Castle Hill Limestone (not on

map)

Cape Vogel Basin, PNG Middle Miocene IA VE A

NG Chimbu Limestone (CB) (also

some Miocene lenses in

volcanic Movi Beds). Equiv.

Nebilyer, Yala & Mendi Lst.

Kubor Anticline, C.

Highlands, Markham,

PNG

Middle Eocene – Early

Oligocene (Ta3 – Tc)

RM/FoB MS ?

NG Chuingai Limestone (CG) South Sepik region, PNG Late Early Miocene to Late

Miocene (Tg) or Pliocene

RM/FoB AT I

NG Darai/Puri Limestone (DA) Kubor Anticline, C.

Highlands & Gulf of

Papua, PNG

Late Oligocene to Middle

Miocene (Te1–4 – Tf).

Eocene in offshore areas

RM AT A

NG Darante Formation (DR) Sarmi & Bufareh, E. Irian

Jaya

Late Oligocene to Early

Miocene (Te – Tf1)

IA VE A

NG Miocene Limestones near Daru

(LD)

Daru, W PNG Miocene RM ? A

NG Dayang Limestone (DY) Batanta Is., Sorong, Irian

Jaya

Late Oligocene – Early Miocene RM EI A

NG Faumai Limestone (F) (NGLG).

Equiv. to Borelis Lst., Morait

beds

E. Birds Head,

Taminabuan, Ransiki,

Irian Jaya

Middle Eocene – Oligocene RM AT A

NG Foasi River Lst. Mm. (FO) (of

Kutu Volcanics) / Nebire lst /

Tatana calcarenite

Port Moresby, PNG Early to Middle Eocene RM VE A

NG Gidobada Limestone (GD) Port Moresby, PNG Middle Miocene IA VE A

NG Gowop Limestone (GW) (includes

Kabwum Lst. Mm.)

Huon Peninsula,

Markham, PNG

Lower Miocene - Pliocene RM/FoB MS A

NG Gulewa Lst. Member (GLM) Misima Island Miocene IA VE A

NG Kais Limestone (K) (NGLG).

Kais Formation. Equiv. to lst.

facies of Klasafet Fm.,

Ayamaru Lst., Klasafet lst./

chalky lst., Sajosa Lst.

Taminabuan, Mar, Irian

Jaya

Early-Late Miocene RM AT I/A

NG Keriaka Limestone (KR) Bougainville Island, E of

PNG

Early Miocene IA VE A

NG Koor Formation (KO) (NGLG) Mar, W Irian Jaya Miocene IA VE A

NG Kumawa (KM) Limestone

(NGLG). Equiv. to Onin &

Ogar to N.

Palau Karas/Adi, Irian

Jaya

Eocene – Late Miocene RM AT ?

NG Lavao Formation (LV) (Lst.

lenses)

Yule, Southern PNG Late Miocene IA VE A

NG Legare Limestone Member

(of Bumi Mudstone) (not

on map)

Enarotali, Irian Jaya Late Pliocene – Pleistocene FoB ? A

NG Lakit Limestone (LK) New Britain, NE of PNG Pliocene or younger IA VE A

NG Lelet Limestone (LL). (Equiv. or

same as Surker Lst in S. New

Ireland)

New Ireland & Djaul

Islands, NE PNG

Early Miocene to Middle or

Late Miocene (diachronous

top and base)

IA VE A

NG Lengguru Limestone (LN)

(NGLG)

Steenkool, Kaimana,

Omba, W Irian Jaya

Eocene – Middle Miocene RM AT ?

NG Manokwari Formation

(MW)

Manokwari, Bird’s Head -

Irian Jaya

Pleistocene IA VE A

NG Marabu Limestone (MA) Wewak, N. PNG Early Pliocene? RM MS ?

NG Modewa River Beds (MR) Southern Papuan

Mainland, Samarai,

PNG

Late Oligocene to Middle

Miocene

IA VE A




Tectonic

Setting Initiation

Isolated/

Attached

NG Mokmer Formation (MK) Biak, Irian Jaya Pleistocene – prob. into

Holocene

RM AT ?

NG Moor Limestone (M). Equiv.

Manumpang Mm. (Yapen)

Waren, Irian Jaya Late Eocene (Yapen – Late

Eocene to Early Miocene)

IA VE A

NG Mundrau Limestone (MN). Part

equiv. to Lelet.

Manus Island, NE PNG Late Early Miocene to earliest

Middle Miocene

IA VE A

NG Nanamajiro Limestone (NN) Enarotali, Irian Jaya Early Oligocene IA VE A

NG Naringel Limestone (NR) Manus Island, NE PNG Early Pliocene IA VE A

NG Nasai Limestone (NS) Woodlark Island, E of

PNG


NG Ogar Limestone (OG) (NGLG) Fak Fak, Palau Karas/Adi,

Irian Jaya

Eocene to Late Miocene RM AT ?

NG Openta Formation (OP) Misool, Irian Jaya Middle Miocene RM ? ?

NG Paniai Group (PA) (undivided) –

NGLG. (Includes Waripi &

Yawee)

Kaimana, Omba,

Enarotali, Waghete, W

Irian Jaya

Latest Cretaceous? – Middle

Miocene?

RM AT ?

NG Puragi Formation (not on map) Taminabuan, Ransiki, W

Irian Jaya

Late Cretaceous? – Middle

Eocene

RM AT A

NG Puwani Limestone (PW). partly.

equiv. to Chuingai Lst.

Wewak, N. PNG Late Oligocene to Middle

Miocene

RM AT A

NG Rumbati Limestone Member

(RT) (NGLG)

Fak Fak, Irian Jaya Middle – Late Miocene RM AT ?

NG Sekau Formation (SE). (NGLG)

Equiv. Sekau Mm. of Kais Fm.,

lower Karabra & Klasafet

argillaceous lst.

Along S. margin of

Ayamaru Plateau,

Taminabuan, Ransiki,

W Irian Jaya

Early to Middle Miocene RM/FoB EI/AT A

NG Sohano Limestone (SH) Bougainville Island, E of

PNG

Pleistocene – some lower

Miocene foraminifera -

IA VE‘ A

NG Suloga Limestone (SL) Woodlark Island, E of

PNG


NG Tibini Limestone Member (TB)

(of Yangi Beds)

South Sepik region, PNG Middle Miocene (Tf1–2) in

upper part, but may be older

(Te) at base

RM AT A

NG Tipsit Limestone (TP) Huon Peninsula,

Markham, PNG

Early –Middle Miocene RM EI A

NG Touiawaira Limestone Member

(TW)

Southern Papuan

Mainland, Samarai, E

PNG

Middle Eocene IA VE A

NG Wai Formation (not on map) Ransiki, Irian Jaya Late Miocene – Pleistocene S EI A

NG Wainukendi Formation (WN) Biak, W Irian Jaya Late Oligocene to Early

Miocene

IA VE A

NG Walordori Formation (WL) Biak, Irian Jaya Early Miocene IA VE A

NG Wedge Hill Limestone (WH) Yule, Southern PNG Pliocene FoB EI A

NG Lst. of Yagroner Hills (not on

map)

Sepik Basin, PNG Middle to Late Eocene IA VE A

NG Yalam Limestone (YL) New Britain, NE of PNG Middle Miocene (Tf), N. New

Britain, other areas, Early

Miocene to Early Pliocene

IA VE A

NG Yawee Limestone (Y) (upper unit

of Paniai) or Lengguru Fm.–

NGLG. Equiv. to Faumai,

Sirga & Kais to N & NW

Omba, Waghete, Irian

Jaya

Eocene – Middle Miocene, may

be a hiatus in the Early

Oligocene (Waghete)

RM AT A

NG Zaag Limestone (Z) Misool, Irian Jaya Middle Eocene – Oligocene RM ? ?


tectonic influences on se asian carbonate systems …searg.rhul.ac.uk/pubs/wilson_hall_2010...

Documents