Look at the Well Log and identifiy which geophysical logs are present. Fill in Table 1 on the Exercise 1 Data Sheet with the logs that are present, along with a short description of what the logs measure.

Use the Gamma Ray Log to identifiy the shales (high radioactivity). u have to be drawing a vertical line showing the “shale baseline” on your log. Generally, any reading above 120 API can be considered a shale in this exercise. Each vertical grid line is 20 API units on this log, so count out to 120, and draw a thick vertical line with a permanent marker for your shale baseline (anything to the right of this line will be considered a shale).

Using the Bulk Density Log (RHOB) (red line on the right column) in conjunction with the Gamma Ray Log, mark off the likely distribution of shale, sandstone, and limestone. The average densities of these rock types are given in the geophysical log section of your lab manual. Remember that limestone has a higher density than sandstone. In general, sandstones and limestones have a low level of radioactivity, and shales have a high level of radioactivity.

Note: Organic black shales have a very high radioactivity. The gamma ray log will show a line that reaches the far right end of the gamma ray column, and then wraps back around to the far left side again to continue adding API units. When this happens, the gamma ray log shows diagonal lines between the gamma ray curves.

Now, color in each of these lithologies (shale, sandstone, and limestone) on the central blank column that shows the footage of the well (these sections are numbered to help you identifiy the boundaries between rock units). Use the following colors: yellow = sandstone; blue = limestone; gray = shale; black = organic shale.

After you have identified all the lithologies on the Well Log, list them from the most radioactive to least radioactive on the Data Sheet.

Using the Neutron Porosity Log (the dashed line on the right column), roughly mark out any porous zones that you think might be important reservoir faces. Using the permanent marker, mark these zones with a star in the central column where you color-coded the rock units. Disregard any shale zones because these zones mark false porosity.

Take a picture of your Well Log and send it to your instructor. (Your instructor should have procedures in place for how to upload your picture.)

EXERCISE 1 POST-LAB QUESTIONS

1. What causes shale zones to have false porosity?

2. What other factors might geologists take into account when assessing reservoir potential?

EXERCISE 1 DATA SHEET

 

"Looking for a Similar Assignment? Get Expert Help at an Amazing Discount!"

Look at the resistor illustrated in Figure A-7. Based on your knowledge of the resistor color code, what are the resistance value and tolerance of this resistor? A. 1.5 k 10% B. 2.7 k 5% C. 30 k 10% D. 525 k 20%FIGURE A-7Use this illustration to answer Question 14

 

"Looking for a Similar Assignment? Get Expert Help at an Amazing Discount!"

Looking for a research guru and can handle getting an assignment done in 18 hours??

For this assignment, you will define the research objectives and develop the research questions and hypotheses to set the stage for the Sun Coast Remediation research project.

Be sure to include the following sections in your submission, and remember to use APA-formatted section headings and subheadings.

• Introduction
• Research problems
• Research objectives: Refer to the Introduction and Statement of Problems sections provided in the Unit II Assignment Template to make explicit statements as to the objectives of this study. For example, “One objective of this research study is to determine the direction (either positive or negative) and the strength of relationships between ABC Company’s various consumer promotions and sales revenue. This objective is intended to determine which promotions may be more effective and strategically important.” Research objectives should be discussed for each problem identified.
• Research questions and hypotheses: Provide research questions and null and alternative hypotheses that align with the research objectives and problems. For example:
  • RQ1: What is the relationship between Promotion 1 and sales revenue?
    • Ho1 (null hypothesis): There is no statistically significant correlation between Promotion 1 (independent variable) and sales revenue (dependent variable).
    • Ha1 (alternative hypothesis): There is a statistically significant correlation between Promotion 1 and sales revenue.
  • RQ2: What is the relationship between Promotion 2 and sales revenue?
    • Ho2: There is no statistically significant correlation between Promotion 2 and sales revenue.
    • Ha1: There is a statistically significant correlation between Promotion 2 and sales revenue.
  • RQ3: Are there differences in return on investment (ROI) between the various promotions?
    • Ho3: There are no statistically significant differences in ROI between Promotion 1 and Promotion 2.
    • Ha3: There are statistically significant differences in ROI between Promotion 1 and Promotion 2.

 

"Looking for a Similar Assignment? Get Expert Help at an Amazing Discount!"

looking for a couple paragraphs explain how to Compute Confidence Intervals for a Proportion. Please add references.

Solution:A confidence interval for a proportion is calculated via taking the point estimateplus as well as minus the margin of error. In addition to this, the margin of error isfigured out by…

 

"Looking for a Similar Assignment? Get Expert Help at an Amazing Discount!"

Looking for 75 words or more to respond to this discussion post.  There are many differences between Popular sources and Scholarly sources.     Five differences of popular sources is that these are from magazines and newspaper articles, because these are usually someone’s opinions or trying to impress a boss.  The do not have an abstract to them, nor do they have references or a bibliography.  These kinds of sources are written by just anyone most of the time.     Scholarly articles are written by an expert in that field.  They have an abstract, an introduction, methods and materials like graphs and tables.  These also give the results of the findings that were tested or in question.  The peer also discusses the findings and what was do to get the results.  Then at the end there is a reference list and a Bibliography of an explanation and discussion of the different scholarly sources that were used.     A scholarly source that I am using is one of the articles that I will be using in my final paper.  It is a journal article by Chris Pawson, entitled “A comparative analysis of students satisfaction with teaching on STEM vs non-STEM programmes” (Pawson, 2012).  In this article, at the beginning there is an abstract tell the reader about the studies that were done getting the opinions of the students that was comparing the STEM programme, and the non-STEM programme.  This article was done by Pawson who was writing the article for the Psychology Teaching Review, which was peer-reviewed.  There was an introduction explaining what was to be reported on the advantages or disadvantage to the STEM programme, which included graphs and tables of how many students approved and how many did not.  Pawson reported on the findings and discussed everything that was done in achieving the results.  There also was a reference page and a Bibliography at the end of the article.     The popular source article was “Why American’s obsession with STEM education is dangerous” by Fareed Zakaria.  This article was found in The Washington Post.  This article was written by using the opinions of others about the program.  There was no abstract, no introduction, no references, no methods or materials were used, no one studied it, so there were no results or findings, just opinions, and no bibliography was attached with it.     To me, all of this were the visual cues as well as the proof of them being scholarly or popular articles.  To me the popular article lacked the proof that the results were not legitimate, and that anyone could have written it.  The writer of the article was a columnist for the newspaper, and because it was just opinions of others, there is no proof of what he had written.                                                                                                                       ReferencesPawson, C. (2012). A Comparative Analysis of students’ satisfaction with teaching on STEM vs. Non-STEM Programmes. Psychology Teaching Review, 18(2), 16-21.        Retrieved from http://www.eric.ed.govZakaria, F. (2015). Why American’s obsession with STEM education is dangerous. The Washington Post. Retrieved from www.washingtonpost.com

 

"Looking for a Similar Assignment? Get Expert Help at an Amazing Discount!"