Quick Search:    advanced search

GSW Home   GeoRef Home   My GSW Alerts   Contact GSW   About GSW   Journals List   Help

Journal of the Geological Society

This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Search for Related Content GeoRef GeoRef Citation

Discussion on the development of rift basins illustrated by the structural evolution of the Oseberg feature, block 30/6, offshore Norway

D. SOUTTER and J. S. RITCHIE write: We have the following reservations regarding the model presented by Badley et al.

1. Whilst agreeing with Badley et al. on the existence of an at least early Triassic, probably Permian, ‘pre-rift’ unconformity, we question their interpretation of tilted fault blocks below this unconformity, on the evidence presented in their fig. 2, on two grounds:

(a) Badley et al. state that supposed sub-unconformity reflectors dip at a steeper angle than their picked unconformity. We question their picking of the unconformity downdip of the crestal structure west of fault B on fig. 2 and believe that they have deviated on to an onlapping reflector, thus making the dip of the unconformity appear less steep.

(b) We believe that the picks below the unconformity reflector, in particular those between shot-points 1400 and 1500, are in fact sea-bed multiples.

On the evidence of other seismic lines to which we have access, we think that the ‘pre-rift’ unconformity may well be faulted crystalline basement in this region (i.e. faulting of Permian age).

2. According to Badley et al.’s model, it is regarded as significant that Hauterivian sediments are found in what they term the Oseberg ‘back basin’, and yet coeval sediments are found west of the 30/6 structure towards the Viking Graben axis at a present-day structural level more than 1400 m lower. Further, it is suggested that migration of fault movement progressed eastward away from the graben axis, and that faults F and G of fig.

...

This 250-word extract was created in the absence of an abstract.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				M. E. BADLEY, J. D. PRICE, C. RAMBECH DAHL, and T. AGDESTEIN The structural evolution of the northern Viking Graben and its bearing upon extensional modes of basin formation Journal of the Geological Society, June 1, 1988; 145(3): 455 - 472. [Abstract] [PDF]