Abstract
Despite over 60 years of helium development in the Sichuan Basin, the mechanism of helium enrichment remains poorly understood. Helium-rich gas is primarily found as gas composition analysis in the fields. This study explores the relationship between helium distribution and two regional shale formations (the Qiongzhusi and Wufeng-Longmaxi formation), basing on the spatial distribution of these shales, structural profiles, and reported helium concentrations. Our findings indicate a typical trend of helium enrichment within the Sichuan Basin, where helium concentrations generally increase from the basin margins toward its center. The R/Ra ratios in the natural gas are consistently below 0.1, indicating that the helium mainly originates from the granite basement. The Wufeng-Longmaxi Formation is absent from central to western parts of this basin. The hydrocarbon generation intensity of this shale is 3,627.26 m³/m2, which is 25,896.7 times greater than its helium generation intensity (0.14 m³/m2). Its helium capture time is short (237 Ma). There is no obvious correlation between the distribution of helium concentration and Wufeng-Longmaxi shale. The Qiongzhusi shale extends across the entire Sichuan Basin. Its hydrocarbon generation intensity is approximately 57 m³/m2, which is 267.4 times greater than its helium generation intensity (0.27 m³/m2). Beneath this shale, the Pre-Sinian granite exhibits a helium generation intensity exceeding 0.51 m³/m2, acting as the primary helium source rock in the basin. The helium capture time of Qiongzhusi shale is 435 Ma. Helium concentration increases as the burial depth of the Qiongzhusi shale decreases, and helium becomes isotopically lighter in the direction of fluid potential drop. This indicates that helium enrichment in the Sichuan Basin is predominantly influenced by the Qiongzhusi shale. From maximum burial depth to present, helium solubility in water has decreased by approximately 63.6% and 54.3% in the Wufeng-Longmaxi and Qiongzhusi shale respectively, suggesting that uplift processes contributed to helium degassing into gas reservoirs. The regional shale influenced the long-distance migration of helium, although faults can alter this pathway. Faults may either promote helium accumulation in shallow gas fields, such as the Jinqiu gas field, or lead to helium loss, as observed in the southeastern region of the Sichuan Basin.
1 Introduction
Helium (He) is an exhaustible natural resource () with the lowest melting and boiling points in the observable universe (). It is considered an invaluable tracer to study a variety of physical processes and is essential in high-tech industry such as medical, aerospace, and atomic applications (; ). Annually, the decay of uranium (U) and thorium (Th) in the Earth’s crust is estimated to produce approximately 8 × 106 m3 of 4He (). As scientific and technological advancements accelerate, global helium consumption has been increasing by 6% annually (; ). It is projected that helium consumption may peak around 2030, at approximately 2.83 × 106 m3 per year (), potentially leading to a global shortage (). As a result, there has been a surge in global interest in helium exploration and development (). Major global helium reserves are concentrated in Qatar (101 × 108 m3), Algeria (82 × 108 m3), Russia (68 × 108 m3), and Canada (20 × 108 m3). In contrast, China’s helium resources estimated at 11 × 108 m3, representing only 2% of the global reserves (). Despite this, China’s helium demand continues to grow at an annual rate exceeding 10% (). Consequently, there has been a notable increase in the exploration and development of helium resources within China in recent years (; ).
The Sichuan Basin, a prominent petroliferous region in China, hosts numerous natural gas fields and has accumulated extensive helium content and geochemical data throughout its development and production history. In 1964, helium-rich gas was first exploited in the Weiyuan gas field, located in the central part of the Sichuan Basin (Figure 1). In the Weiyuan gas field, the average helium concentration is about 1,598 ppm and helium reserve is estimated at 0.8 × 108 m3. It was the China’s sole commercially developed helium gas field at that time (). Despite over 60 years of helium extraction from the Weiyuan gas field (), the mechanisms deriving helium enrichment in the Sichuan Basin remain poorly understood. Currently, helium-rich gas is primarily found through natural gas composition analyses, which obviously significantly restricts the exploration of helium ().
FIGURE 1
In recent years, advancements in understanding physical properties of helium and the geological conditions favorable for helium-rich gas deposits, have led to identify a strong correlation between helium enrichment and the presence of regional mudstone or gypsum layers (
In this study, the distribution of helium resources in the Sichuan Basin by compiling available data. The objectives of this study are: (1) to investigate the relationship between helium-rich gas and shale layers ofthe Qiongzhusi and Wufeng-Longmaxi formation in the Sichuan Basin, based on the burial depth, structural profiles, and the distribution of helium gas; and (2) interpret the mechanisms driving helium enrichment in the Sichuan Basin to offer valuable insights for predicting the presence of helium-rich gas.
2 Geological setting
The Sichuan Basin, situated on the western margin of the Yangtze Craton in southwestern China (
The Sichuan Basin comprises a 6,000 to 12,000 m thick sedimentary succession ranging from the Ediacaran to the Cenozoic, which overlies a pre-Sinian Proterozoic basement. This basement lies beyond the resolution of seismic profiles but is inferred to be predominantly granitic, based on sparse outcrop evidence (Figure 2). From the late Sinian to late Triassic, the Sichuan Basin was mainly filled with marine strata. Subsequently, 3,000–4,000 m of continental siliciclastic rocks were deposited in the basin since the Late Triassic (
FIGURE 2

The lithological association of the Sichuan Basin and the position of three detachment faults in stratigraphic record of the basin (
Large amounts of gas and oil have been discovered in the Sichuan Basin, spanning more than 25 conventional and tight oil and gas-bearing layers (including 18 marine facies) and 2 shale gas-producing layers (Figure 2). From 1949 to 2019, over 6,487.8 × 108 m3 gas were produced (
Shale gas in the Sichuan Basin is mainly exploited from the upper Ordovician Wufeng Formation to lower Silurian Longmaxi Formation (O3w-S1l) (
3 The distribution of helium in natural gas
3.1 The horizontal distribution
The natural gas is exploited from over 25 distinct gas-bearing layers across different regions of the Sichuan Basin, with production layers varying by location (Figure 3; Table 1). In the North low steep fold and thrust belt, natural gas is mainly exploited from the upper Triassic Xujiahe Formation (T3x), lower Permian (P1), upper Permian Changxing formation (P2ch), and the upper Carboniferous Huanglong Formation (C2h). Helium concentration in the Xujiahe Formation (T3x) ranges from 70 ppm to 400 ppm, with an average of 140 ppm, while it is in the range of 10–290 ppm, with an average of 150 ppm in Permian strata. Helium concentration in the Huanglong Formation (C2h) is 370 ppm.
FIGURE 3

The helium concentration in the different formations.
TABLE 1
| Formation | North low steep fold-and- thrust belt | West depression | Southwest low-flat structural belt | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| He/ppm | R/Ra | N2/% | CO2/% | He/ppm | R/Ra | N2/% | CO2/% | He/ppm | R/Ra | N2/% | CO2/% | |
| K | - | - | - | - | 79 | - | 0.69 | 0.09 | - | - | - | - |
| J | - | - | - | - | 39–410 (190) | 0.001–0.002 | 0.09–1.7 (0.73) | 0.01–0.44 (0.11) | - | - | - | - |
| T | 70–400 (140) | 0.009–0.034 | 0.02–2.64 (0.69) | 0–5.87 (1.33) | 37–200 (190) | 0.001–0.005 | 0.1–16.45 (1.39) | 0–1.55 (0.76) | 180–640 (410) | - | - | - |
| P | 10–290 (150) | 0.011–0.012 | 1.3–1.47 (1.38) | 0.26–0.78 (0.26) | - | - | - | - | 170 | - | - | - |
| C | 370 | 0.034 | 0.31 | 0.89–1.11 (1.00) | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| S | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| O | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Є | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Z | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Formation | Central flat and gentle fold belt | East high and steep structural zone | South broom-shaped structural belt | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| He/ppm | R/Ra | N2/% | CO2/% | He/ppm | R/Ra | N2/% | CO2/% | He/ppm | R/Ra | N2/% | CO2/% | |
| K | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| J | 230–2013 (799) | 0.012–0.025 | 0.2–5.06 (1.26) | 0.01–0.34 (0.12) | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| T | 172–469 (315) | 0.009–0.019 | 0.11–19.94 (1.61) | 0.15–1.65 (0.51) | 10–470 (167) | 0.002–0.035 | 0.09–1.36 (0.79) | 0.02–32.26 (4.71) | 270–600 (435) | - | - | 0.16–0.23 (0.19) |
| P | 30–2,120 (1,152) | 0.022 | 3.09–6.49 (4.28) | 0.94–3.89 (2.07) | 56–1,500 (389) | 0.007–0.028 | 0.2–1.44 (0.753) | 0.06–11.7 (3.91) | 470–650 (586) | - | - | 0.6–0.78 (0.69) |
| C | - | - | - | - | 120–947 (445) | 0.004–0.024 | 0.22–4.65 (1.5) | 0.07–5.29 (1.46) | - | - | - | - |
| S | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| O | 1,670–1750 (1710) | - | 0–0.52 (0.27) | 6.02–7.84 (6.93) | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Є | 100–2,620 (935) | 0.01–0.03 | 0.32–10.92 (3.96) | 0–6.45 (2.68) | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| Z | 90–18770 (1,290) | 0.013–0.041 | 0.47–37.37 (4.16) | 0.01–10.88 (5.10) | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
The helium concentration in the gas field in different tectonic units and formations summarized from the Supplementary Material, Table 1.
In the West depression, natural gas is mainly exploited from Cretaceous, the Middle and upper Jurassic Suining Formation (J2sn) and Penglaizhen Formation (J3p), and the upper Triassic Xujiahe Formation (T3x). The helium concentration in Cretaceous is 79 ppm. For the Jurassic strata, helium levels range from 39 to 410 ppm, with an average of 190 ppm. In the Xujiahe Formation (T3x), helium concentrations range from 37 to 200 ppm, averaging 190 ppm.
In the Southwest low-flat structural belt, natural gas is mainly extracted from Triassic and Permian formations. Helium concentrations in the Triassic range from 180 to 640 ppm, with an average of 410 ppm. In the Permian, the helium concentration is around 170 ppm.
In the Central flat and gentle fold belt, natural gas is produced from almost all sedimentary strata (Table 1). Helium concentrations in the Jurassic range from 230 to 2013 ppm (average 799 ppm). The Triassic shows helium concentrations of 172–469 ppm (average 315 ppm). Helium concentration in Permian ranges from 30–2,120 ppm, (average 1,152 ppm), while the Ordovician contains helium concentrations of 1,670–1,750 ppm (average 1,710 ppm). The Cambrian and Sinian formations show helium concentration in the ranges of 100–2,620 ppm (average 935 ppm) and 90–18,770 ppm (average 1,290 ppm).
In the East high and steep structural zone, natural gas is mainly sourced from the upper Triassic Xujiahe Formation (T3x), Permian and the upper Carboniferous Huanglong Formation (C2h). Helium concentration in the Xujiahe Formation (T3x) ranges of 10–470 ppm (average 167 ppm), compared to 56–1,500 ppm (average of 389 ppm) for the Permian. Helium concentration in the Huanglong Formation (C2h) in the range of 120–947 ppm (average 445 ppm).
In the South broom-shaped structural belt, natural gas is mainly extracted from the lower Triassic Feixianguan (T1f) and Jialingjiang Formation (T1j), and the lower Permian Maokou Formation (P1m). Helium concentration in Triassic ranges from 270 to 600 ppm (average 435 ppm), while in the Permian helium concentration is in the range of 470–650 ppm (average 586 ppm).
Overall, helium-rich gas fields (≥500 ppm) are predominantly located in the Central flat and gentle fold belt (
In the Sichuan Basin, shale gas is primarily extracted from the Wufeng-Longmaxi Formation (O3w-S1l). In the southern part of the basin, helium concentrations in shale gas varies from 173 to 414 ppm (average below 300 ppm), as observed in the Weirong, Changning, and Zhaotong shale gas fields (Table 2). Other shale gas fields, such as those in Fuling, Weiyuan, and Fushun-Yongchuan, have an average helium concentration of approximately 400 ppm. In the eastern Sichuan Basin, helium concentrations are somewhat higher, with the Pengshui shale gas field exhibiting a concentration of about 993 ppm. Additionally, helium concentrations in the lower Cambrian Qiongzhusi shale (Є1q) are greater than those in the Wufeng-Longmaxi (O3w-S1l) shale, reaching up to 1,400 ppm. Overall, there is no distinct pattern in the distribution of helium across shale gas fields in the basin.
TABLE 2
| Shale gas | He/ppm | R/Ra | N2/% | CO2/% | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fuling(S1l) | 199–474 (377) | 0.007–0.04 | 0.24–1.36 (0.67) | 0–1.16 (0.27) | |
| Weiyuan (S1l) | 228–12522.8 (411) | 0.02–0.03 | 0.01–2.95 (0.93) | 0.02–1.16 (0.83) | |
| Weiyuan (Є) | 1,400 | 0.02 | - | - | |
| Pengshui(S1l) | 986–1,000 (993) | 0.03 | 0.05–0.15 (0.10) | 0.035–0.93 (0.64) | |
| Fushun-Yongchuan(S1l) | 410 | 0.02 | 0.1–4.05 (1.17) | 0–1.48 (0.97) | |
| Weirong(S1l) | 201–214 (208) | 0.027 | 0.44–0.72 (0.59) | 1.48–1.68 (1.58) | |
| Changning(S1l) | 180–353 (225) | 0.02–0.03 | 0–0.51 (0.31) | 0–0.91 (0.36) | |
| Zhaotong(S1l) | 173–414 (282) | 0.01–0.04 | 0.03–0.63 (0.41) | 0–0.24 (0.1) |
The He, N2 and CO2 concentration and R/Ra in the different shale gas fields.
3.2 The vertical distribution
As shown in Figure 3, helium concentrations are highest in the Sinian Dengying Formation (Z2d) and lowest in the Cretaceous deposits. Vertically, there is a slight decrease in helium concentration upward, suggesting that helium primarily originates from deeper layers. High helium concentration layers (≥1,000 ppm) are predominantly found in the deeper strata, such as the Sinian, Cambrian, Permian, and a shallow layer (J2) in the Jinqiu gas field. These helium-rich layers are interbedded with helium-poor layers (<500 ppm), indicating that helium enrichment is influenced by factors beyond vertical diffusion, including other geological processes.
It has been proved that the gas in Dengying Formation (Z2d) originated from the Qiongzhusi shale (Є1q) (
4 Source of helium
4.1 Resource identification initiative
Helium in natural gas is derived from three types of sources, as indicated by the 3He/4He ratio (R): (1) atmospheric helium, with R=1.4 ×10−6 (Ra), is mainly released through volcanic eruptions, magma degassing, and rock weathering (
In the Sichuan Basin (Figure 4A), the R/Ra ratio in gas fields varies from 0.002 to 0.05 (average 0.016). For shale gas, the R/Ra ratio ranges from 0.007 to 0.04 (average 0.015). All these values are below 0.1, indicating that the helium in the Sichuan Basin is predominantly crust-derived. However, mantle-derived helium has been reported in several hot springs in the western Sichuan Basin (
FIGURE 4

(A) The scatter diagram of R/Ra, (B) The scatter diagram showing the correlation between N2 and helium concentration, (C) The scatter diagram showing the correlation between CO2/3He and helium concentration, (D) The correlation between the CH4/3He and R/Ra, where EPR is East Pacific Rise, ZO is Zambales Ophiolite in the Philippines (
4.2 Origin of N2, CO2 and CH4
Nitrogen (N₂) in natural gas originates from several sources, including primordial nitrogen from the mantle, volcanic magma, radioactivity, the atmosphere, sedimentary organic matter, and clay minerals (
In the Sichuan Basin, N₂ concentration varies widely, ranging from 0.01% to 37.37% (Figure 4B). For shale gas, N₂ concentrations range from 0.01% to 4.05% (average 0.65%). In contrast, N₂ concentrations in gas fields variy from 0.02% to 37.37% (average 2.39%). This indicates that N₂ is significantly more abundant in natural gas than in shale gas, suggesting that N₂ in the Sichuan Basin did not primarily originate from sedimentary organic matter in hydrocarbon source rocks.
In the Jinqiu gas field, natural gas predominantly comes from the Xujiahe Formation (T3x) (
In the Weiyuan gas field, N₂ concentrations range from 3.09% to 37.37%, (average 8.16%), which is notably higher than in other gas fields. This indicates that the N₂ in the Weiyuan gas field likely derived from the granite basement of the Sichuan Basin. Conversely, N₂ concentrations are lowest in the basin periphery, with values in the Pengshui, Zhaotong, and Changning shale gas fields being less than 0.63% (average 0.34%). This suggests that minimal N₂ in these areas is derived from the granitic basement of the Sichuan Basin.
Overall, it can be inferred that the source of helium differs between within and outside the Sichuan Basin. Within the basin, helium primarily originated from the granite basement of the Sichuan Basin, whereas in the basin periphery, helium sources differ, with minimal contribution from the basin basement.
It is accepted that both CO2 and low helium concentration (<200 ppm) are mantle-derived (
Globally, gases from mid-ocean ridge basalts exhibited a similar CO₂/³He molar ratio, averaging 2 × 10⁹. In eastern China, as the molar ratio of CO₂ to ³He decreases, helium concentration increases by three orders of magnitude in gas reservoirs (
Based on extensive CH₄/³He data from various global locations (
4.3 The source of noble gases
Generally, 20Ne in natural gas originates from the atmosphere and enters the crust through groundwater recharge (
In contrast, this linear relationship is not evident in the Changning shale gas field (R2 = 0.123), indicating that helium may not primarily migrate with groundwater flow in this field (Figure 5A). The 4He/20Neratios in the Sichuan Basin, ranging from 3,951 to 67,228, are significantly higher than the atmospheric ratio of 0.32 (
FIGURE 5

(A) The correlation between the 20Ne and 4He, (B) The scatter diagram of 4He/20Ne and R/Ra, showing the helium mantle-derived is less than 0.5%.
5 Helium generation condition
The primary source of helium in natural gas is attributed to the radioactive decay of U and Th in the underlying strata. The rate of radioactive decay is not affected by pressure or temperature. Instead, the amount of helium generated depends primarily determined on the concentrations of U and Th in the strata, as well as the age and volume of these strata (
The total helium generation can be estimated as follows:where, QHe is the amount of helium resource (m3),
ρHe is the helium generation intensity (m3/t),
vrock is the volume of the helium source rock (m3),
ρs is the density of the helium source rock (t/m3),
is the age of the helium source rock (a),
[U] is the concentration of the U in the helium source rock (ppm),
[Th] is the concentration of the Th in the helium source rock (ppm).
The age of Wufeng-Longmaxi shale is estimated to be 442 Ma, according to the International Chronostratigraphic Chart 2023 (
TABLE 3
| Formation | Lithology | U (ppm) | Th (ppm) | ρHe (×10−12 t/m3) | Thickness (m) | ρs (t/m3) | Trock (a) | Helium generation intensity (m3/m2) | Hydrocarbon generation (m3/t) | Hydrocarbon generation intensity (m3/m2) | Dilution of hydrocarbon generation |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Wufeng-Longmaxi (O3w-S1l) | shale | 10.6 | 16.1 | 1.74117 | 70 | 2.6 | 442,000,000 | 0.14 | 19.93 | 3,627.26 | 25,896.7 |
| Qiongzhusi (Є1q) | shale | 12.8 | 10.8 | 1.8547 | 80 | 2.66 | 540,000,000 | 0.21 | - | 57 | 267.4 |
| Pre-Sinian (Anz) | granite | 6.7 | 32.5 | 1.74079 | 120 | 2.63 | 794,000,000 | 0.44 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
The helium generation condition of Wufeng-Longmaxi shale, Qiongzhusi shale, and Pre-Sinian granite.
The age of the Qiongzhusi Formation is estimated to be 540 Ma (
U-Pb dating of the Pre-Sinian granite drilled in Weiyuan gas field (well W117) indicates an age of 794 ± 11 Ma (
6 Discussion
6.1 The spatial matching relationship between the helium and reginal shale layer
6.1.1 The coupling relationship between helium concentration and the shale layer
As shown in Figure 6, the Wufeng-Longmaxi shale is absent in the central to western parts of the Sichuan Basin. The burial center is located in the northeastern Sichuan Basin, where the burial depth of the Wufeng-Longmaxi shale exceeds 6,000 m, dipping toward the southwest. The shallowest area is near the Weiyuan gas field, with exposures in the core of the Huayingshan anticline in Guang’an city. In the deep (northeast Sichuan Basin) and shallow areas, there are gas fields with low helium concentrations (<200 ppm) as well as those with moderate helium concentrations (200–500 ppm). There is no obvious correlation between helium concentration in these gas fields and the spatial distribution of the Wufeng-Longmaxi shale. Meanwhile, the helium-rich gas fields (≥500 ppm) are located in areas where the Wufeng-Longmaxi shale is absent, suggesting that helium enrichment in the Sichuan Basin is not significantly controlled by the presence of the Wufeng-Longmaxi shale.
FIGURE 6

The burial depth map of Wufeng-Longmaxi shale and the distribution of natural gas.
As shown in Figure 7, there are three burial centers of the Qiongzhusi Formation within the Sichuan Basin, located near Mianyang city, the Puguang gas field, and the Zhangjiachang gas field, with maximum burial depths exceeding 10,000 m. In these centers, the gas fields are predominantly characterized by low helium concentrations (<200 ppm). As the burial depth of the Qiongzhusi Formation decreases toward the Weiyuan area, helium concentrations in the gas fields gradually increase. Prior to the peak helium concentrations in the Weiyuan gas field, the gas migration pathways were highly compatible with the regional dome structure formed by the Qiongzhusi shale. This indicates that helium enrichment in the Sichuan Basin is significantly controlled by the presence of the Qiongzhusi shale.
FIGURE 7

The burial depth map of Qiongzhusi shale and the distribution of natural gas.
The correlation between the helium concentration and the distribution of Qiongzhusi shale is clearly presented in the structural profiles too (Figure 8). In the NS-NE structural profile, as the Qiongzhusi shale becomes progressively shallower toward the southwest, helium concentrations increases from 166 ppm in the Yuanba gas field in the northeastern part of the basin to 503 ppm in the Moxi gas field, ultimately reaching a high enrichment of 2,475 ppm in the Weiyuan gas field. Similarly, in the NW-SE structural profile, helium concentrations also show a tendency to accumulate toward the Ziyang gas field, where they reach up to 1,158 ppm. In contrast, the gas fields in the West Depression and South Broom-Shaped Structural Belt re characterized by low helium concentrations. This trend is consistent with the accumulation patterns of oil and gas within the basin. However, in the southeastern region of the NW-SE structural profile, the presence of several steep-dip faults in the Qiongzhusi Formation being much flatter compared to the northwest region. This geological variation leads to a broader range of helium concentrations in the southeast, which are slightly higher than those in the northwest.
FIGURE 8

The structural profile in the NE and SE direction basing on the seismic tectonic interpretation and the wells. The distribution of sectional lines in the surface is showing in the Figure 1.
6.1.2 The coupling relationship between helium isotope and the shale layer
It is well established that Earth’s 3He is primordial, captured from the solar nebula during the planet’s formation (
However, during migration, helium undergoes isotopic fractionation due to differences in the densities of its isotopes. Over long distances, this fractionation causes in an enrichment of the lighter isotope (3He) in the helium-rich gas fields. As shown in Figure 9A, the R/Ra ratio exhibits an increasing trend along the helium accumulation pathways in the north-south direction (from the Zhongba to Bajiaochang to Moxi to Weiyuan gas fields). Similarly, in the northeast-southeast direction (from Huangcaoba, Xiangguosi, Hechuan, Moxi to Weiyuan) (Figure 9B), the R/Ra ratio also increases along the helium accumulation paths. This indicates that helium becomes isotopically lighter in the direction of the fluid potential drop, a process clearly controlled by the Qiongzhusi shale.
FIGURE 9

(A) R/Ra ratios in the NS direction (Zhongba-Bajiaochang-Moxi-Weiyuan gas field), (B) In the NE-SE direction (Huangcaoba-Xiangguosi-Hechuan-Moxi-Weiyuan).
6.2 The influence of regional shale on the helium enrichment
6.2.1 Dilution of hydrocarbon generation
As mention above, the gas in Dengying Formation originated from the Qiongzhusi shale (
Based on solid bitumen in the Wufeng-Longmaxi shale,
Therefore, the dilution effect of hydrocarbon generation is most pronounced in the Wufeng-Longmaxi shale, being approximately 96 times greater than that in the Qiongzhusi shale. This accounts for the lower helium concentration observed in the Wufeng-Longmaxi shale compared to the Qiongzhusi shale. Additionally, while the hydrocarbons in the Dengying Formation primarily originate from the Qiongzhusi shale, the helium mainly derived from the Pre-Sinian granite. The helium generation intensity in the Pre-Sinian granite is higher than in the Qiongzhusi shale, and the dilution effect from hydrocarbon generation is also weaker in the Pre-Sinian granite. As a result, the helium concentration in the Dengying Formation is exceeds that in its hydrocarbon source rock.
6.2.2 Helium exsolution with the uplift process
Previous studies proved that helium is least soluble in water at 30°C and pressures between 0.1 and 100 MPa (
According to the burial history of well 202 in the Weiyuan gas field (
FIGURE 10

The burial history of Well 202 in the Weiyuan gas field modified from
In contrast, the Wufeng-Longmaxi shale was uplifted to shallower layers by the late Carboniferous. During this uplift process, most of the helium dissolved in pore water likely escaped due to the decreased helium solubility as the strata rose. The Wufeng-Longmaxi shale reached early maturity (Ro = 0.5%–0.7%) around 237 Ma. Thus, the helium capture time for the Wufeng-Longmaxi shale is likely estimated at 237 Ma, significantly shorter than that of the Qiongzhusi shale. Consequently, the helium concentration in the aquifer beneath the Wufeng-Longmaxi shale is likely lower than in the aquifer beneath the Qiongzhusi shale.
Both the Qiongzhusi shale and Wufeng-Longmaxi shales reached their maximum burial depth during the mid-Cretaceous (approximately 100 Ma). Since then, both formations have been progressively uplifted to their current depths. The Qiongzhusi shale has been uplifted from 6,300 m to 2,800 m, leading to a reduction in hydrostatic pressure from 63 to 28 MPa, a decrease of about 35 MPa. Similarly, the Wufeng-Longmaxi shale has been uplifted from 5,200 to 1,800 m, with a corresponding pressure drop of approximately 34 MPa.
According to the
At 80°C and 100 MPa, helium solubility in water is about 8,376 mL/L, which is 100 to 1,000,000 times greater than in natural gas (
In the Sichuan Basin, the distribution of helium-rich gas is closely linked to fault locations. Deep faults penetrating from deeper to shallower strata are found around the basin boundary, in the South Broom-Shaped Structural Belt, and in the East High and Steep Structural Zone (Figure 8). Helium from deep layers can migrate to shallower layers through these faults. Near the basin boundary, where there are no hydrocarbon traps, helium may escape to the atmosphere. However, in the South Broom-Shaped Structural Belt and East High and Steep Structural Zone, helium may be partially captured by gas reservoirs adjacent to these deep faults. The concentration of helium in these reservoirs varies, influenced not only by the spatial arrangement of faults and gas reservoirs, but also by other factors such as hydrocarbon dilution, helium source, and other geological characteristics.
In the Central flat and gentle fold belt, where few deep faults are observed (Figure 8), helium accumulation is primarily governed by the Qiongzhusi shale. In the deep layers beneath the Jinqiu gas field, a fault traverses the Qiongzhusi shale, potentially facilitating a pathway for some helium migration from beneath the shale to shallower traps. In contrast, in the Low Steep Fold-and-Thrust Belt, while many faults are observed in the shallow layers, they do not extend through the Qiongzhusi shale. As a result, helium migration to shallow layers is limited, and gas reservoirs in this region are characterized by lower helium concentrations.
6.3 The helium enrichment in central Sichuan basin
The relationship between helium-rich gas distribution and shale is typical in the central Sichuan Basin (Figure 11). In the Gaoshi-Moxi gas reservoir and Weiyuan gas reservoir, the reservoirs are interbedded with mudstone or shale layers. In the Gaoshi-Moxi gas reservoir, helium concentration decreases progressively upwards. In Member 2 of the Dengying Formation, helium concentrations range from 0.018% to 0.102%, while in Member 4, they range from 0.012% to 0.029%. Both are higher than the concentrations found in the Cambrian gas reservoir, which range from 0.005% to 0.008%. A similar pattern is observed in the Weiyuan gas reservoir, where helium concentrations are lowest in the Permian gas reservoirs.
FIGURE 11

(A) The contour map of the Dengying Formation bottom and the distribution of the wells head, (B) the structural profile showing the distribution of gas reservoirs in the central Sichuan Basin, modified from
Within a single gas formation, helium concentration tends to increase as burial depth decreases. For example, in the Dengying Formation, helium concentrations are only 0.012%–0.102% in the Gaoshi-Moxi gas reservoir but increase to 0.12%–0.25% in the Weiyuan gas reservoir. This pattern is consistent with the accumulation of hydrocarbons (
As fluids migrate from the Gaoshi-Moxi gas reservoir to the Weiyuan gas reservoir, the formation pressure decreases by more than 25 MPa, which lead to a notable drop in helium solubility in water. Consequently, some of the helium that was dissolved in the water is released and accumulated in the Weiyuan gas reservoirs. Regional shale layers facilitated the long-distance migration of helium alongside carrier gases. This migration help in partial offset the relatively low helium generation rates (liters produced annually per cubic kilometer of rock) (
7 Conclusion
The helium distribution in the Sichuan Basin exhibits a typical enrichment trend from the basin margins toward the center, but within the Wufeng-Longmaxi shale gas fields, helium-rich and -poor layers are interbedded, suggesting that vertical diffusion is not solely controlled helium enrichment.
Natural gas samples across the basin have R/Ra ratios less than 0.1, while higher ratios in hot springs within the Longmenshan Fold Beltsugges that most helium is crust-derived, with only minor mantle contributions in the western depression. N2 concentrations are higher in gas reservoirs (0.02%–37.37%) compare to shale gas, with the lowest levels at the basin periphery, indicating the primary helium source is the granite basement.
The CO2/3He ratio decreases from 2 × 1011 to 2 × 108 in the East high and steep structure zone (Figure 1), indicating that deep faults facilitated helium migration to shallower layers. Helium accumulates with methane migration from the northern low-steep fold and thrust belt to the Weiyuan gas field. The absence of the Wufeng-Longmaxi shale in the central and western Sichuan Basin and its significant hydrocarbon generation compared to helium generation suggest its minimal impact on helium concentration. The Wufeng-Longmaxi shale is absent from central to western parts of the Sichuan Basin. Hydrocarbon generation intensity of this shale is about 3,627.26 m3/m2, which is 25,896.7 times bigger than its helium generation intensity (0.14 m3/m2). The dilution effect of hydrocarbon generation is significant in the Wufeng-Longmaxi shale. The helium capture time for this shale is about 237 Ma, which is short compare to the Qiongzhusi shale. No clear correlation is observed between helium concentration distribution and the presence of Wufeng-Longmaxi shale.
The Qiongzhusi shale, covering the entire Sichuan Basin, has a much lower dilution effect compared to the Wufeng-Longmaxi shale. The Pre-Sinian granite, underlying the Qiongzhusi Formation, is the main helium source rock with a longer helium capture time of about 435 Ma. Helium concentration in the Qiongzhusi shale increases with decreasing burial depth, and helium isotopic compositions become lighter with fluid potential drops, indicating that helium enrichment is largely controlled by the Qiongzhusi shale.
Post-burial uplift of about 3,400 m in the Weiyuan area has reduced helium solubility in water by 63.58% in the Wufeng-Longmaxi shale and 54.29% in the Qiongzhusi shale, facilitating helium degassing and migration into gas layers. Regional shale layers support long-distance helium migration, but faults can disrupt this process. The most promising exploration area for helium-rich gas is northeast of the Ziyang gas field, where shallow gas fields connected to deep angle faults through the Qiongzhusi shale are favorable for helium accumulation.
Statements
Data availability statement
The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/Supplementary Material, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.
Author contributions
JH: Writing–original draft, Writing–review and editing. SL: Project administration, Supervision, Writing–review and editing. AZ: Formal Analysis, Writing–original draft. DW: Data curation, Writing–original draft. JG: Project administration, Writing–original draft. XZ: Writing–review and editing. MA: Writing–review and editing. ZW: Investigation, Methodology, Writing–original draft. LZ: Data curation, Writing–original draft.
Funding
The author(s) declare that financial support was received for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. This study was supported by the Sichuan Science and Technology Program (No. 2024NSFSC0085), National Natural Science Foundation of China (NO. U20B6001), the SINOPEC Key Laboratory of Geology and Resources in Deep Stratum (No. 33550000-22-ZC0613-0254), and Researchers Supporting project number (RSP2024R455), King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Acknowledgments
We thank the support obtained from the Sichuan Science and Technology Program (No. 2024NSFSC0085), National Natural Science Foundation of China (NO. U20B6001), the SINOPEC Key Laboratory of Geology and Resources in Deep Stratum (No. 33550000-22-ZC0613-0254), and Researchers Supporting project number (RSP2024R455), King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. The authors further thank the handling editor Hongjian Zhu and three reviewers for their constructive comments that improved the manuscript.
Conflict of interest
Authors JH, SL, and JG were employed by SINOPEC.
The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
The reviewer ZQ declared a past co-authorship with the author JH to the handling editor.
Publisher’s note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
Supplementary material
The Supplementary Material for this article can be found online at: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/feart.2024.1491017/full#supplementary-material
References
1
AbrajanoT. A.SturchioN. C.BohlkeJ. K.LyonG. L.PoredaR. J.StevensC. M. (1988). Methane-hydrogen gas seeps, Zambales Ophiolite, Philippines: deep or shallow origin?Chem. Geol.71 (1-3), 211–222. 10.1016/0009-2541(88)90116-7
2
AbrosimovV.LebedevaE. (2013). Solubility and thermodynamics of dissolution of helium in water at gas partial pressures of 0.1–100 MPa within a temperature range of 278–353 K. Russ. J. Inorg. Chem.58, 808–812. 10.1134/S0036023613070024
3
AndersonS. T. (2018). Economics, helium, and the US federal helium reserve: summary and outlook. Nat. Resour. Res.27, 455–477. 10.1007/s11053-017-9359-y
4
ByrneP. (2021). The Prospect for crustal recycling on rocky solar system worlds. Bull. Am. Astron. Soc.53 (3), 1253.
5
BallentineC. J.BurnardP. G. (2002). Production, Release and Transport of Noble Gases in the Continental Crust. Petroleum Explor. Dev.47 (1), 481–538. 10.2138/rmg.2002.47.12
6
BrennanS. T.RiveraJ. L.VarelaB. A.ParkA. J. (2021). National assessment of helium resources within known natural gas reservoirs. Reston, VA: Scientific Investigations Report.
7
BrownA. A. (2010). “Formation of high helium gases: a guide for explorationists,” in AAPG conference (New Oleans, Louisiana, USA: AAPG).
8
ChenJ.LiuK.DongQ.WangH.LuoB.DaiX. (2021). Research status of helium resources in natural gas and prospects of helium resources in China. Nat. Gas. Geosci.32 (10), 1436–1449. 10.11764/j.issn.1672-1926.2021.08.006
9
ChenX.ChenG.BianR.DuW. (2023a). The helium resource potential and genesis mechanism in Fuling shale gas field, Sichuan Basin. Nat. Gas. Geosci.3 (34), 469–476. 10.11764/j.issn.1672-1926.2022.07.011
10
ChenY.TaoS.YangX.GaoJ.TaoX.ChenY.et al (2023b). The geochemical characteristics and enrichment of helium in shale gas and coalbed methane. Nat. Gas. Geosci.34 (4), 684–696. 10.11764/j.issn.1672-1926.2022.12.004
11
DaiJ. (2003). Pool-forming periods and gas sources of Weiyuan Gasfield. Petroleum Geol. Exp.25 (5). 10.3969/j.issn.1001-6112
12
DaiJ.DaiC.SongY. (1994). Geochemical characters, carbon and helium isotopic compositions of natural gao from hot springs of some areas in China. Science in China. Ser. B37 (6), 758–768.
13
DaiJ.NiY.QinS.HuangS.GongD.LiuD.et al (2017). Geochemical characteristics of He and CO2 from the Ordos (cratonic) and Bohaibay (rift) basins in China. Chem. Geol.469 (2017), 192–213. 10.1016/j.chemgeo.2017.02.011
14
DaiJ.ZouC.DongD.NiY.WuW.GongD.et al (2016). Geochemical characteristics of marine and terrestrial shale gas in China. Mar. Petroleum Geol.76, 444–463. 10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2016.04.027
15
DaiJ.ZouC.ZhangS.LiJ.NiY.HuG.et al (2008). Discrimination of abiogenic and biogenic alkane gases. Sci. China Ser. D Earth Sci.51 (12), 1737–1749. 10.1007/s11430-008-0133-1
16
DuJ.ChengW.ZhangY.JieC.GuanZ.LiuW.et al (2006). Helium and carbon isotopic compositions of thermal springs in the earthquake zone of Sichuan, Southwestern China. J. Asian Earth Sci.26 (5), 533–539. 10.1016/j.jseaes.2004.11.006
17
GaoM.YangM.LuY.LevinV.HeP.ZhuH. (2024). Mechanical characterization of uniaxial compression associated with lamination angles in shale. Adv. Geo-Energy Res.13 (1), 56–68. 10.46690/ager.2024.07.07
18
GeT. (2019). Control factors of shale gas enrichment in Weiyuan area, Sichuan Basin. Master. China University of Petroleum.
19
GuZ.YinJ.YuanM.BoD.LiangD.ZhangH.et al (2015). Accumulation conditions and exploration directions of natural gas in deep subsalt Sinian-Cambrian System in the eastern Sichuan Basin, SW China. Petroleum Explor. Dev.42 (2), 152–166. 10.1016/S1876-3804(15)30002-1
20
GuoL. (2014a). Geological characteristics of the black shale and prospective eevaluation of the shale gas in lower cambrianof upper Yangtze area. Master: Chengdu University of Technology.
21
GuoX. (2014b). Enrichment mechanism and exploration technology of fuling shale gas field. China. Beijing: Science Press.
22
HalfordD. T.KarolytėR.BarryP. H.WhyteC. J.DarrahT. H.CuzellaJ. J.et al (2022). High helium reservoirs in the four corners area of the Colorado plateau, USA. Chem. Geol.596, 120790. 10.1016/j.chemgeo.2022.120790
23
HaoY.KuangX.FengY.WangY.ZhouH.ZhengC. (2023). Discovery and genesis of helium-rich geothermal fluids along the India–Asia continental convergent margin. Geochimica Cosmochimica Acta360, 175–191. 10.1016/j.gca.2023.09.011
24
HeJ.WangJ.MilschH.QiuZ.YuQ. (2020). The characteristics and formation mechanism of a regional fault in shale strata: insights from the Middle-Upper Yangtze, China. Mar. Pet. Geol.121 (2020), 104592. 10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2020.104592
25
HeJ.WangJ.YuQ.LiuW.GeX.YangP.et al (2018). Pore structure of shale and its effects on gas storage and transmission capacity in well HD-1 eastern Sichuan Basin, China. Fuel226, 709–720. 10.1016/j.fuel.2018.04.072
26
JiaL.MaB.WangH.YuY.XuJ.ChenJ.et al (2022). Progress and utilization status of global helium exploration and development. Geol. China49 (5), 1427–1437. 10.12029/gc20220505
27
JiangP.WuJ.ZhuY.ZhangD.WuW.ZhangR.et al (2023). Enrichment conditions and favorable areas for exploration and development of marine shale gas in Sichuan Basin. Acta Pet. Sin.44 (1), 91–109. 10.7623/syxb202301006
28
KennedyB.TorgersenT.Van SoestM. (2002). Multiple atmospheric noble gas components in hydrocarbon reservoirs: a study of the Northwest Shelf, Delaware Basin, SE New Mexico. Geochimica Cosmochimica Acta66 (16), 2807–2822. 10.1016/S0016-7037(02)00883-9
29
LiC.PangX.MaX.WangE.HuT.WuZ. (2021). Hydrocarbon generation and expulsion characteristics of the Lower Cambrian Qiongzhusi shale in the Sichuan Basin, Central China: implications for conventional and unconventional natural gas resource potential. J. Petroleum Sci. Eng.204 (2021), 108610. 10.1016/j.petrol.2021.108610
30
LiY.LiJ.ZhouJ.ZhaoF.XuD. (2022). Research progress and new views on evaluation of helium resources. J. Earth Sci. Environ.44 (2), 1–11. 10.19814/j.jese.2021.11008
31
LiY.ZhangW.WangL.ZhaoF.HanW.ChenG. (2017). Henry's law and accumulation of weak source for crust-derived helium: a case study of Weihe Basin, China. J. Nat. Gas Geoscience2 (5), 333–339. 10.1016/j.jnggs.2018.02.001
32
LiangB.LiuY.SuZ.ZhangN.LiS.FengW. (2023). A workflow for interpretation of fracture characteristics based on digital outcrop models: a case study on ebian XianFeng profile in Sichuan Basin. Lithosphere2022 (Special 13), 7456300. 10.2113/2022/7456300
33
LiuK.ChenJ.FuR.WangH.LuoB.ChenZ.et al (2023). Distribution characteristics and controlling factors of helium-rich gas reservoirs. Gas Sci. Eng.2023 (110), 204885. 10.1016/j.jgsce.2023.204885
34
LiuK.ChenJ.FuR.WangH.LuoB.DaiX.et al (2022). Discussion on distribution law and controlling factors of helium-rich natural gas in Weiyuan gas field. J. China Univ. Petroleum Edition Nat. Sci.46 (4), 12–21. 10.3969/i.issn.1673-5005.2022.04.002
35
LiuK.ChenJ.TangS.ZhangJ.FuR.ChenC.et al (2024). Differential enrichment mechanism of helium in the Jinqiu gas field of Sichuan Basin, China. Mar. Pet. Geol.2024 (167), 106970. 10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2024.106970
36
LiuQ.LiuW.KroossB.WangW.DaiJ. (2006). Advances in nitrogen geochemistry of natural gas. Nat. Gas. Geosci.17 (1), 119–124. 10.3969/j.issn.1672-1926.2006.01.025
37
LiuS.MaW.JansaL.HuangW.ZengX.ZhangC. J. E. E.et al (2013). Characteristics of the shale gas reservoir rocks in the lower silurian Longmaxi Formation, East Sichuan Basin, China. Acta Petrol. Sin.31 (2), 187–219. 10.1260/0144-5987.31.2.187
38
LiuY. F.QiuN. S.XieZ. Y.YaoQ. Y.ZhuC. Q. (2016). Overpressure compartments in the central paleo-uplift, Sichuan Basin, southwest China. AAPG Bull.100 (5), 867–888. 10.1306/02101614037
39
MaY.GuoX.GuoT.HuangR.CaiX.LiG. (2007). The Puguang gas field: new giant discovery in the mature Sichuan Basin, southwest China. AAPG Bull.91 (5), 627–643. 10.1306/11030606062
40
MansourA.WagreichM. (2022). Earth system changes during the cooling greenhouse phase of the Late Cretaceous: coniacian-Santonian OAE3 subevents and fundamental variations in organic carbon deposition. Earth-Science Rev.229, 104022. 10.1016/j.earscirev.2022.104022
41
MansourA.WagreichM.GentzisT.OcubalidetS.TahounS. S.ElewaA. M. J. M. P. G. (2020). Depositional and organic carbon-controlled regimes during the Coniacian-Santonian event: first results from the southern Tethys (Egypt). Mar. Petroleum Geol.115 (104285), 104285. 10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2020.104285
42
MengB.ZhouS.LiJ.SunZ. (2021). Helium potential evaluation of different types of rocks in the Upper Yangtze region and theoretical calculation of helium recovery conditions for shale in Upper Yangtze region. Mineral. Petrol.41 (4), 102–113. 10.19719/i.cnki.1001-6872.2021.04.10
43
MohrS.WardJ. (2014). Helium production and possible projection. Minerals4 (1), 130–144. 10.3390/min4010130
44
NanshengQ.WenL.XiaodongF.WenzhengL.QiuchenX.ChuanqingZ. (2021). Maturity evolution of lower cambrian Qiongzhusi Formation shale of the Sichuan Basin. Mar. Petroleum Geol.128 (2021), 105061. 10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2021.105061
45
NiY.DaiJ.TaoS.WuX.LiaoF.WuW.et al (2014). Helium signatures of gases from the Sichuan Basin, China. Org. Geochem.74, 33–43. 10.1016/j.orggeochem.2014.03.007
46
NieH.LiuQ.DangW.LiP.SuH.BaoH.et al (2023). Enrichment mechanism and resource potential of shale-type helium: a case study of Wufeng Formation-Longmaxi Formation in Sichuan Basin. Sci. China Earth Sci.6 (53), 1285–1294. 10.1360/SSTe-2022-0285
47
QinS.LiJ.WangJ.TaoG.WangX. (2023). Models of helium enrichment in helium-rich gas reservoirs of petroliferous basins in China. Nat. Gas. Ind. B10 (2), 130–139. 10.1016/j.ngib.2023.01.006
48
QiuZ.ZouC.MillsB. J.XiongY.TaoH.LuB.et al (2022). A nutrient control on expanded anoxia and global cooling during the Late Ordovician mass extinction. Commun. Earth Environ. Ecol.3 (1), 82–89. 10.1038/s43247-022-00412-x
49
SuA.ChenH.FengY.-x.ZhaoJ.-x.NguyenA. D.WangZ.et al (2020). Dating and characterizing primary gas accumulation in Precambrian dolomite reservoirs, Central Sichuan Basin, China: insights from pyrobitumen Re-Os and dolomite U-Pb geochronology. Precambrian Res.350, 105897. 10.1016/j.precamres.2020.105897
50
TaoS.ChenY.YangY. (2024). Helium resource and play classification systems, effective reservoir control elements and enrichment patterns in China. Nat. Gas. Geosci.5 (35), 869–889. 10.11764/i.issn.1672-1926.2024.04.012
51
TaoX.LiJ.ZhaoL.LiL.ZhuW.XingL.et al (2019). Helium resources and discovery of first supergiant helium reserve in China: hetianhe gas field. Earth Sci.44 (3), 1024–1041. 10.3799/dqkx.2018.381
52
TengerB.TaoC.HuG.ShenB. (2020). Effect of hydrocarbon expulsion efficiency on shale gas formation and enrichment. Petroleum Geol. Exp.42 (3), 325–344. 10.11781/sysydz202003325
53
WangX.LiuQ.LiuW.ZhangD.LiX.ZhaoD.et al (2022). Accumulation mechanism of mantle-derived helium resources in petroliferous basins, eastern China. Sci. China Earth Sci.65 (12), 2322–1962334. 10.1007/s11430-022-9977-8
54
WangH.GaoR.LuZ.LiW.GuoH.XiongX.et al (2017). Deep crustal structure in Sichuan basin: deep seismic reflection profiling. Chin. J. Geophys.60 (8), 2913–2923. 10.6038/cjg20170801
55
WangX.LiuQ.LiuW.LiX.TaoC.LiX.et al (2023a). Helium accumulation in natural gas systems in Chinese sedimentary basins. Mar. Petroleum Geol.150, 106155. 10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2023.106155
56
WangX.LiuQ.LiuW.LiX.TaoC.LiX.et al (2023b). Helium accumulation in natural gas systems in Chinese sedimentary basins. Mar. Petroleum Geol.2023 (150), 106155. 10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2023.106155
57
WangX.LiuW.LiX.LiuQ.TaoC.XuY. (2020). Radiogenic helium concentration and isotope variations in crustal gas pools from Sichuan Basin, China. Appl. Geochem.117 (2020), 104586. 10.1016/j.apgeochem.2020.104586
58
XiaoL.ShaoguangM.GuoqinL.GuoyongX.RuolinL.GenshengN.et al (2022). Sedimentary environment and shale gas exploration potential of Qiongzhusi Formation in the upslope area: a case study on Well W-207, Weiyuan area, Sichuan Basin. Bulletion Geoloial Sci. Technol.41 (5), 68–82. 10.19509/j.cnki.dzkg.2022.0159
59
ZhangB.ZhangB.WangH.ChenJ.LiuK.DouS.et al (2024a). The Jinqiu gas field in the Sichuan Basin: a typical helium-bearing to helium-rich gas field with the Mesozoic sedimentary rocks as helium source rocks. Oil & Gas Geol.45 (1), 185–199. 10.11743/ogg20240113
60
ZhangJ.YangW.YiH.XieW.XieZ.ZengF.et al (2015). Feasibility of high-helium natural gas exploration in the Presinian strata, Sichuan Basin. Nat. Gas. Ind. B2 (1), 88–94. 10.1016/j.ngib.2015.02.007
61
ZhangW.ChenW.LiY.ZhouJ.YangG. (2024b). Noble gas characteristics of microbial gas in the Qaidam Basin, China: implications for helium enrichment processes. Mar. Petroleum Geol.165 (2024), 106897. 10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2024.106897
62
ZhaoD.WangX.LiuW.LiX.ZhangD.LiX.et al (2023a). Mechanisms of helium differential enrichment and helium‐nitrogen coupling: a case study from the Weiyuan and Anyue gas fields, Sichuan Basin, China. Geol. J.59 (1), 272–287. 10.1002/gj.4860
63
ZhaoD.WangX.LiuW.ZhangD.LiX.ZhangJ. (2023b). Calculation method and geological significance of dissolved and exsolved helium in pore water. Nat. Gas. Ind. B43 (2), 155–164. 10.3787/j.issn.1000-0976.2023.02.016
64
ZhuD.LiuQ.HeZ.DingQ.WangJ. (2020). Early development and late preservation of porosity linked to presence of hydrocarbons in Precambrian microbialite gas reservoirs within the Sichuan Basin, southern China. Precambrian Res.342, 105694. 10.1016/j.precamres.2020.105694
65
ZhuG. (2006). The characteristics of natural gas in Sichuan basin and its sources. Earth Sci. Front.13 (2), 234–248. 10.3321/j.issn:1005-2321.2006.02.022
66
ZouC.DongD.WangY.LiX.HuangJ.WangS.et al (2016). Shale gas in China: characteristics, challenges and prospects (II). Petroleum Explor. Dev.43 (2), 182–196. 10.1016/S1876-3804(16)30022-2
Summary
Keywords
regional shale, helium generation, helium enrichment, Sichuan Basin, hydrocarbon dilution
Citation
He J, Li S, Zhao A, Wang D, Gao J, Zhou X, Ahmed MS, Wang Z and Zhu L (2024) The relationship between helium-rich gas and regional shale in the Sichuan Basin, Southwest China. Front. Earth Sci. 12:1491017. doi: 10.3389/feart.2024.1491017
Received
04 September 2024
Accepted
27 September 2024
Published
11 October 2024
Volume
12 - 2024
Edited by
Hongjian Zhu, Yanshan University, China
Reviewed by
Zhen Qiu, Research Institute of Petroleum Exploration and Development (RIPED), China
Tianxu Guo, China Geological Survey, China
Ahmed Mansour, Southwest Petroleum University, China
Updates

Check for updates
Copyright
© 2024 He, Li, Zhao, Wang, Gao, Zhou, Ahmed, Wang and Zhu.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Jianglin He, 5hjl998@163.com
Disclaimer
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.