MarzCorp_Matapedia_Interp_Report_AN

INTERPRETATION REPORT AEROMAGNETIC AND GRAVIMETRIC SURVEY Geophysical Permit 2011GC002 PROJE C T: MATAPEDIA Gaspesian Peninsula, Quebec UTM: 22B For: MARZCORP OIL & GAS INC. 3565, Jarry East, Suite 109 Montreal, Qc, H1Z 4K6

By: Géophysique Camille St-Hilaire Inc. 678, Route des Pionniers, CP53 Rouyn-Noranda (Quebec), Canada, J9X 5C1 Phone: (819) 762-2838

Ref: P11-04-018

October 2011

INTERPRETATION REPORT

AEROMAGNETIC AND GRAVIMETRIC SURVEY Geophysical Permit 2011GC002

PROJECT: MATAPEDIA Gaspesian Peninsula, Quebec UTM: 22B Ref.: P11-04-018

For:

MARZCORP OIL & GAS INC.

October 2011

TABLE OF CONTENT

1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................. 1 2.0 GEOLOGICAL CONTEXT .............................................................................................. 6 2.1 Regional Geology .................................................................................................. 6 2.2 The Gaspe Belt....................................................................................................... 6 2.3 Structural Geology of the Gaspe Belt .................................................................... 9 2.4 Magmatic Rocks .................................................................................................. 10 3.0 THE GRAVIMETRIC TECHNIQUE ............................................................................. 12 3.1 Introduction.......................................................................................................... 12 3.2 Simple Shapes Modelling .................................................................................... 13 3.3 Inversion of Gravimetric Anomalies: 2.5-D Modelling ...................................... 13 3.4 Other Interpretation Techniques .......................................................................... 13 4.0 THE AEROMAGNETIC TECHNIQUE......................................................................... 14 4.1 Introduction.......................................................................................................... 14 4.2 Enhancement of Magnetic Grids ......................................................................... 15 4.3 The Aeromagnetic Prospection............................................................................ 16 4.4 Qualitative Data Interpretation ............................................................................ 16 4.5 Quantitative Data Interpretation .......................................................................... 20 4.5.1 Spectral Analysis ..................................................................................... 20 4.5.2 Depth Calculation of a Dike with Peters’s Technique............................. 23 4.5.3 2.5-D Modelling....................................................................................... 24 5.0 OTHER AVAILABLE DATA ........................................................................................ 24 5.1 Seismic Transects and Drill Holes ....................................................................... 24 5.2 Ground Gravimetric Data .................................................................................... 30 6.0 DATA INTERPRETATION ........................................................................................... 33 6.1 Introduction.......................................................................................................... 33 6.2 Gravimetric Data Interpretation........................................................................... 33 6.2.1 Qualitative Data Interpretation ................................................................ 33 6.2.2 Quantitative Data Interpretation .............................................................. 34 6.2.2.1 Depth Calculation: Simple Geometric Model.............................. 34 6.2.2.2 Depth Calculation: Power Spectrum............................................ 35 6.2.2.3 2.5D Modelling ........................................................................... 38 6.3 Aeromagnetic Data Interpretation........................................................................ 40 6.3.1 Qualitative Data Interpretation ................................................................ 40 6.3.1.1 Magnetic Lineaments................................................................... 40 6.3.1.2 Geophysical Units ........................................................................ 40 6.3.2 Quantitative Data Interpretation .............................................................. 40 6.3.2.1 Depth Calculation: Peters’s Technique........................................ 40 6.3.2.2 Depth Calculation: Power Spectrum............................................ 42 6.3.2.3 2.5-D Modelling.......................................................................... 42 7.0 CONCLUSIONS.............................................................................................................. 45 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................ 47

ANNEX A: Map in a 8.5” X 11” Reduced Format

i

LIST OF FIGURE

Figure 1: Survey Locations ............................................................................................................. 4 Figure 2: Survey Area Topographic Relief..................................................................................... 5 Figure 3: Structural division of the segment of the Gaspé Peninsula (Malo et al., 2009) .............. 7 Figure 4: The Connecticut Valley-Gaspé Synclinorium............................................................... 11 Figure 5: Stratigraphic Legend of Figure 4 (Brisebois et al., 2000) ............................................. 12 Figure 6: The Earth’s Magnetic Field........................................................................................... 15 Figure 7: Total Magnetic Field Anomaly Shapes (Field Inclination: 90 o ) ................................... 18 Figure 8: Qualitative Interpretation Exemples (Fault, Dike, Intrusion)........................................ 19 Figure 9: Qualitative Interpretation Exemples (Faulted Geological Fold) ................................... 20 Figure 10: Example of Power Spectrum....................................................................................... 22 Figure 11: Seismic Transect and Drill Hole Locations................................................................. 26 Figure 12: Stratigraphic and Seismostratigraphic Charts (Morin, Laliberté, 2001) ..................... 27 Figure 13: Drill Holes 1969FC088 and 1967FC086 Logs (Morin, Laliberté, 2002) ................... 27 Figure 14: The Sayabec–Roncevaux Transect Interpretation (Morin, Laliberté, 2001)............... 28 Figure 15: A Flat Spot, an Oil Indicator (Flat Spot, VB-04C) (Morin, Laliberté, 2001) ............. 29 Figure 16: A Rollover, Another Oil Indicator (Morin, Laliberté, 2002) ...................................... 29 Figure 17: Ground Gravimetric Station Locations (Pinet et al., 2005)......................................... 31 Figure 18: Regional Bouguer Anomaly (Gravity Background from CGC) ................................. 32 Figure 19: Two Simple Models for Gravimetric Data Interpretation ........................................... 36 Figure 20: Gravimetric Profile A-A’ (Horizontal Cylinder Model Interpretation) ...................... 37 Figure 21: Power Spectrum of the Gravimetric Data ................................................................... 38 Figure 22: 2.5D Modelling of the A – A’ Gravimetric Profile.................................................... 39 Figure 23: RTP Aeromagnetic Profile A-A’, Peters’s Interpretation Technique ......................... 41 Figure 24: Power Spectrum of the Aeromagnetic Data ................................................................ 43 Figure 25: 2.5-D Modelling of the Aeromagnetic Profile A – A’ ............................................... 44 Figure 26: Bouguer Anomaly ....................................................................................................... 53 Figure 27: Vertical Gradient of the Bouguer Anomaly ................................................................ 54 Figure 28: Reduced to Pole Residual Magnetic Field .................................................................. 55 Figure 29: Vertical Gradient of the RTP Residual Magnetic Field .............................................. 56 Figure 30: Second Vertical Derivative of the RTP Residual Magnetic Field............................... 57 Figure 31: Analytic Signal of the RTP Residual Magnetic Field ................................................. 58 Figure 32: Automatic Gain Correction ......................................................................................... 59 Figure 33: Magnetic Tilt of the RTP Residual Magnetic Field .................................................... 60 Figure 34: Gravimetric Data Interpretation Map .......................................................................... 61 Figure 35: Magnetic Data Interpretation Map .............................................................................. 62

ii

Interpretation Report, Matapedia Project

1.0 INTRODUCTION From a hydrocarbon exploration point of view, the Early to Middle Paleozoic basins of the northern Canadian Appalachians represent true ‘Frontier’ basins. Direct hydrocarbon indicators (seepages) have been known for more than a century (Lavoie et al., 2001)), but exploration drill holes are scarce and data on hydrocarbon systems (source rocks, maturation, timing of migration and potential reservoirs), as well as fair-quality seismic data, have been collected only recently. In this area, bedrock exposure is poor, hence analysis of potential field data (gravity and aeromagnetic) provides an important tool for developing a “robust” regional framework within which more detailed studies may be integrated (Pinet et al., 2005). The use of potential field data can improve our understanding of the geometry of the basins in two distinct but complementary ways: - The data represent spatially continuous grids of information that provide an important supplement to the spatially discrete observations derived from bedrock geological mapping; - The quantitative modelling of these data provides a method for testing geological-based basin geometry. Quantitative geophysical modelling may be achieved by two methods: - A 2D geological model may be evaluated and refined using trial and error forward modelling techniques; - Secondly, inverse or automatic fitting methods may be applied. These methods have been proven useful for relatively simple cases in which anomalies are associated with few bodies having a significant density or magnetic susceptibility contrast with surrounding rocks (Chakravarthi and Sundararajan, 2004, Gallardo et al., 2005). This report concerns the interpretation of a magnetic and gravimetric airborne survey carried out between May 30 and June 20, 2011 on the Matapédia Project located in the Gaspé Peninsula, belonging to the firm MarzCorp Oil & Gas Inc. (2011GC002 geophysical survey permit). The primary objective of this interpretation work is to contribute to the geological mapping of the area while trying to set up structures potentially favourable to the presence of hydrocarbons. The survey was conducted by Geo Data Solutions GDS Inc. using a twin-engine aircraft Piper PA- 31 Navajo. The aircraft was equipped with an optical pumping magnetometer manufactured by Geometrics, model G822A. The magnetic sensor was embedded within a kevlar shell attached to the tail of the aircraft.

1

MarzCorp Oil & Gas Inc.

Interpretation Report, Matapedia Project

The aircraft followed a pre-determined flight surface whose average height above ground was 250 metres. The sampling rate of the magnetometer was 10 readings per second and the average distance between the Total Field Magnetic data along the survey lines was 8 meters. On the other hand, Geo Data Solutions GDS Inc. appointed the firm Canadian Micro Gravity Ltd. to achieve the gravity survey. A Helicopter Astar 350B-2 equipped with a GT-1A gravimeter was used. This gravimeter is composed of three basic units: the main sensor, rotary table and the anti-shock system. During the survey, the helicopter also followed a predefined flight surface with an average height above ground of 270 meters. The average distance between the gravity data measured along the survey lines was 19 metres. Table 1 shows the flight path specifications while tables 2 and 3 show respectively the magnetic and gravity block coordinates. Figure 1 shows the survey locations. The topographic relief in the survey area, described as moderate, was not a challenge during the data acquisition period (Figure 2). In the following sections, the reader will find: - A description of the general geological context (section 2) - A presentation of the gravimetric method (section 3) - A presentation of the magnetic method (section 4) - A brief overview of existing public information (seismic traverses, ground gravimetric data) (section 5) - The interpretation of data acquired in 2011 (section 6)

Table 1: Flight Path Survey Specifications

Mean Altitude

Line Type

Number of km 19 527 km

Total Km

Survey Type

Spacing

Azimut

Traverse Tie line Traverse Tie line

300 m

N145°E N055°E N000°E N090°E

22 468

250 m

Magnetic

2 000 m

2 941 km 3 964 km 1 224 km

750 m

5 188

270 m

Gravimetric

2 500 m

2

MarzCorp Oil & Gas Inc.

Interpretation Report, Matapedia Project

Table 2: Aeromagnetic Survey Limits (Nad83)

Vertex

Longitude 49°00’01” N 48°45’01” N 48°17’14” N 48°08’20” N 48°08’38” N 48°18’55” N Longitude 48°11’22” N 48°16’46” N 48°16’52” N 48°27’39” N 48°27’32” N 48°20’47” N 48°20’43” N 48°23’25” N 48°23’23” N 48°25’08” N 48°25’06” N 48°29’41” N 48°29’47” N 48°40’21” N 48°40’19” N 48°45’43” N 48°45’40” N 48°48’09” N

Latitude

Vertex

Longitude 48°25’42” N 48°48’42” N 48°48’46” N 48°50’19” N 48°50’15” N 49°03’13” N Longitude 48°48’04” 48°48’56” 48°48’52” 48°51’34” 48°51’26” 48°36’36” 48°36’23” 48°26’56” 48°26’59” 48°24’17” 48°24’20” 48°19’42” 48°19’45” 48°17’10” 48°17’14” 48°14’29” 48°14’33” 48°11’02”

Latitude

1 2 3 4 5 6

66°47’48” O 66°47’55” O 67°05’59” O 67°25’56” O 67°50’36” O 68°01’04” O

7 8 9

68°01’07” O 67°40’24” O 67°40’28” O 67°37’01” O 67°36’57” O 66°51’00” O

10 11 12

Table 3: Gravimetric Survey Limits (Nad83)

Vertex

Latitude

Vertex

Latitude 67°28’42” 67°28’40” 67°23’46” 67°23’41” 67°15’06” 67°15’37” 67°02’11” 67°02’33” 67°04’59” 67°05’05” 67°08’08” 67°08’18” 67°11’20” 67°11’25” 67°16’16” 67°16’22” 67°21’13” 67°21’19”

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

67°47’57” O 67°47’50” O 67°57’32” O 67°57’19” O 67°44’32” O 67°44’42” O 67°38’38” O 67°38’33” O 67°35’31” O 67°35’28” O 67°33’02” O 67°32’54” O 67°42’02” O 67°41’46” O 67°39’20” O 67°39’11” O 67°34’54” O 67°34’50” O

19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

3

MarzCorp Oil & Gas Inc.

Interpretation Report, Matapedia Project

Mont-Joli

Aeromagnetic Survey

Matane

Gravimetric Survey Figure 1: Survey Locations

4

MarzCorp Oil & Gas Inc.

Interpretation Report, Matapedia Project

-68°00'

-67°45'

-67°30'

-67°15'

-67°00'

-66°45'

-68°00'

-67°45'

-67°30'

-67°15'

-67°00'

Figure 2: Survey Area Topographic Relief

5

MarzCorp Oil & Gas Inc.

Interpretation Report, Matapedia Project

2.0 GEOLOGICAL CONTEXT

2.1 Regional Geology The Gaspé Peninsula is part of the Appalache Geological Province which extends on the East coast of the North America, from Newfoundland to Alabama. In Gaspesia, the Appalachian orogeny is usually made up of three main phases: - The Taconian (late Ordovician) - The Acadian (which grew from the early Silurian to mid-Devonian) - The Alleghanian (Permo-Carboniferous) North of the peninsula, a strip of sedimentary and volcanic Cambro-Ordovician rocks, filed the initial rift and the Laurentia margin, as well as remnants of Iapetus oceanic crust, had been deformed to the Taconian (Figure 3). The Cambro-Ordovician strata belong to the Humber Zone (William, 1979) which cuts the sediment and volcanic rocks deposited on the passive margin of Laurentia (Figure 3). South of these rocks, and covering the largest part of the Gaspé Peninsula and New Brunswick, the Gaspé Belt is a disposition of sedimentary, volcanic, and intrusive rocks put in place in an intracratonic Basin developed on a taconian basement. The Gaspé Bel t is divided into three major structural zones: - The Connecticut Valley-Gaspé Synclinorium , North; The Connecticut Valley-Gaspé Synclinorium represents the northern part of the siluro- Devonian basin of the Gaspé Belt , while the Aroostook-Percé Anticlinorium , with the Chaleur Bay synclinorium represents the southern part of the basin (Roy, 2008). The area flown by the magnetic/gravimetric survey is largely covered by the Connecticut Valley-Gaspé Synclinorium (Figures 3 and 4). 2.2 The Gaspe Belt The Gaspé Belt is a Late Ordovician (Caradoc) to Middle Devonian (Frasnian) successor basin that oversteps the margins of two major zones of deformed Cambrian to Middle Ordovician rocks, namely the Humber Zone (Laurentian margin) to the northwest and Dunnage Zone (Iapetan oceanic tract) to the southeast. Evidence that the Gaspé Belt is mainly underlain by rocks of Dunnage affinity is provided by numerous inliers of pre-Late Ordovician volcanic and sedimentary rocks in Maine, New Brunswick and Gaspé Peninsula (Reginald et al., 2005). The Gaspé Belt is commonly regarded as comprising three zones, namely, from northwest to southeast, the Connecticut Valley–Gaspé Synclinorium , Aroostook–Percé Anticlinorium , and - The Aroostook-Percé Anticlinorium , centre; - The Charleur Bay Synclinorium , South.

6

MarzCorp Oil & Gas Inc.

Interpretation Report, Matapedia Project

Chaleur Bay Synclinorium (Figure 3). The former two zones are juxtaposed along the Restigouche-Grand Pabos Fault , whereas the irregular demarcation between the latter two zones is more arbitrarily defined. . A) The Connecticut Valley–Gaspé Synclinorium (Figures 3 and 4) The Connecticut Valley-Gaspé Synclinorium constitutes that area west of the Restigouche-Grand Pabos Fault and underlies the extreme northwestern part of New Brunswick. It comprises deep water siliciclastic rocks of the Fortin Group , and relatively shallow-water siliciclastic rocks of the Gaspé Sandstone Group . In central Gaspé Peninsula the latter is conformable on the former, although in New Brunswick they are juxtaposed along the Sainte-Florence Fault .

Figure 3: Structural division of the segment of the Gaspé Peninsula (Malo et al., 2009)

7

MarzCorp Oil & Gas Inc.

Interpretation Report, Matapedia Project

B) The Aroostook-Percé Anticlinorium The Aroostook-Percé Anticlinorium is host to the oldest rocks in the Gaspé Belt, namely Upper Ordovician to Lower Silurian deep-water turbidite deposits that are broadly divided into a lower siliciclastic assemblage and an upper carbonate-rich assemblage. The siliciclastic rocks have been assigned to the Garin Formation in Québec (Malo, 1988), the Madawaska Lake Formation in Maine, and the Grog Brook Group in northern New Brunswick, whereas the carbonate rocks are assigned to the Matapédia Group in New Brunswick and Gaspé (Lespérance et al., 1987), and the Carys Mills Formation in Maine. On the western flank of the Aroostook-Percé Anticlinorium , between the Lower Downs Gulch and Restigouche-Grand Pabos Fault, the Matapédia Group is conformably overlain by Silurian rocks of the Perham Group . C) The Chaleur Bay Synclinorium The Chaleur Bay Synclinorium comprises two subzones that are juxtaposed along the Rocky Brook-Millstream Fault , namely the Chaleur Subzone to the north and the Tobique Subzone to the south: - The Chaleur Subzone consists, in ascending order, of Lower Silurian to Lower Devonian rocks of the Chaleurs Group , and Lower Devonian rocks of the Dalhousie Group and Campbellton Formation ; - The Tobique Subzone is composed of the Chaleurs Group and overlying Lower Devonian rocks that are assigned to the Tobique Group . The Chaleurs-Dalhousie contact is conformable to disconformable, whereas the Campbellton Formation overlies the Dalhousie Group with slight angular unconformity. Coarse-grained, flat-lying, Carboniferous terrestrial redbeds of the Bonaventure Formation unconformably overlie the Chaleurs and Dalhousie groups and the Campbellton Formation . On the southeastern margin of the Chaleur Bay Synclinorium , the Chaleurs Group unconformably overlies the Middle to Upper Ordovician Fournier Group in the Miramichi Highlands and Elmtree Inlier .Where not faulted, the contact between strata assigned to the Aroostook- Percé Anticlinorium and Chaleur Bay Synclinorium is conformable (Bourque et al., 1995). The complex history of the Chaleur Bay Synclinorium is expressed by: - Locally abrupt lateral and vertical facies changes related to differential uplift and eustatic sea level changes (Bourque 2001); - Local Wenlockian-Ludlovian and Lochkovian to Emsian intraplate magmatic activity;

8

MarzCorp Oil & Gas Inc.

Interpretation Report, Matapedia Project

- Late Silurian (Salinic) tectonism (Malo and Bourque 1993; Malo and Kirkwood 1995). This complex history is reflected in the contrasting stratigraphy at different locations. For example, uplift associated with the Salinic Orogeny has produced a widespread Late Silurian erosional unconformity (the Salinic disconformity) that separates the lower part and the upper part of the Chaleurs Group in the Squaw Cap-Dalhousie and Upsalquitch Forks-Jacquet River areas. However, in other places this disconformity is absent, most notably in the Chaleurs Group type section in southeastern Gaspé Peninsula. For this reason, units immediately above the Salinic disconformity that have historically been considered part of the Chaleurs Group , such as the Indian Point Formation , are included in the Chaleurs Group rather than the overlying Dalhousie Group . 2.3 Structural Geology of the Gaspe Belt Acadian regional folds P2 are generally straight and open, low plunging toward NE and SW, and discharged to the SE (Malo and Béland, 1989). Near major faults, folds are tighter, and plunge more strongly. Folds are generally released to NW even though they are discharged to the SE in the South of the Gaspé Peninsula. The deformation intensity increases from North to South. D2 deformation was developed in several stages (Kirkwood, 1993). The first three, layer-parallel shortening, folding and cleavage of the formation, are associated with a vertical extension of the rocks deformed in a system of coaxial deformation (pure shear). Overlaps were formed during these steps. The last step occurred during a regional deformation in simple shear producing a horizontal extension in the rocks and strike-slip faults. Major faults are oriented NE-SW in Western and North-Central Gaspé Peninsula, oriented NW- SE in the Northeast, and E-W in the South. Faults oriented E-W of the Grand Pabos Fault system ( Grande Rivière , Grand Pabos and Rivière Garin faults) are strike-slip dextre faults (Malo and Béland, 1989; Kirkwood and Malo, 1993), as well as the fault of the Shickshock South in the centre-north (Sacks et al., 2004). In the Aroostook-Percé Anticlinorium , the Acadian structural elements are all consistent with a classical model of a dextre plate tectonics sliding (Malo and Béland, 1989). North Central NE- SW trending faults are considered reverse faults with a motion to the NW. In the Matapédia region, analysis of the Fortin Group rock deformations and of kinematic indicators in the Sainte-Florence Fault zone suggests that the fault was first a reverse fault to NW then with a dextral strike-slip (Kirkwood et al., 1995). On the most recent seismic profile, the Sainte-Florence Fault appears as a thrust fault with a dipping lower than 45° (Morin and Laliberté, 2001). A seismic profile also reveals new elements on the geometry of the Acadian deformation. The blind overlaps, the triangular area at the front of the deformation, duplexes and low-dip thrust faults are characteristic of a deformation of thin- skin tectonics type of an overlap belt (Beausoleil et al., 2001). To the South of the seismic

9

MarzCorp Oil & Gas Inc.

Interpretation Report, Matapedia Project

profile, the Restigouche Fault , which limits the areas north and south of the Matapédia region, is interpreted as an oblique dextral fault (Trudel and Malo, 1993). Trending NE-SW faults of the South Gaspé Peninsula are generally dipping towards the NW and the reverse movement is towards the SE. Reverse faults towards the NW, located to the North of the Grand Pabos Fault , and reverse faults towards the SE, located South of the fault, have been interpreted as part of the tectonic regime of trans pressure associated with the Grand Pabos Fault (Malo and Kirkwood, 1995). In addition, these faults could be of retro overlap type. The NE-SW trending faults located in the Témiscouata area are interpreted as oblique-dextral faults (Malo et al., 1995). The major faults of the North-East of the Gaspé Peninsula, including the Bras Nord-Ouest , the Troisième Lac and the Gastonguay faults, are NW-SE oriented. A structural analysis of the Devonian rocks along the Bras Nord-Ouest and the Troisième Lac faults (Béland, 1980; Berger and Ramsay, 1993) indicates that these faults are of type Acadian strike-slip fault. The structural history of these faults is on the other hand more complex. These faults were active as normal faults during sedimentation. There are also indications that the Bras Nord-Ouest Fault played as a dextral strike-slip fault before the Silurian (Béland, 1980; Berger and Ramsay, 1993) In the northeast of the Gaspé Peninsula, the ENE-WSW oriented fault bordering the South of the Saint-Jean River Anticline is interpreted as a retro overlap fault to the SE (Kirkwood et al., 2004). 2.4 Magmatic Rocks The Siluro-Devonian igneous rocks of the Gaspé Peninsula include felsic and mafic volcanic rocks. They are presented in the form of plutons, dikes and sills that crosscut the Gaspé Belt and the Cambro-Ordovician (Doyon et al., 1997). Their distribution is very heterogeneous. They are concentrated among others in the corridor Pilote-Mont Louis, the mount Alexandre Syncline, the Restigouche-Maria corridor, and several Acadian faults (Grand Pabos-Restigouche, Grande Rivière, Ruisseau Porphyre).

10

MarzCorp Oil & Gas Inc.

Interpretation Report, Matapedia Project

Figure 4: The Connecticut Valley-Gaspé Synclinorium

11

MarzCorp Oil & Gas Inc.

Interpretation Report, Matapedia Project

Figure 5: Stratigraphic Legend of Figure 4 (Brisebois et al., 2000)

3.0 THE GRAVIMETRIC TECHNIQUE 3.1 Introduction Gravity and magnetic survey are both methods of remote sensing. They can detect the properties of rocks at distance, from the air, on the ground or at the sea surface (Riddihough, 1996). Anomalies and changes in the value of gravity reflect changes in density. Anomalies and changes in the value of the Earth’s magnetic field reflect changes in magnetization. Both gravity and magnetic anomalies are a function of the distance between the detector and the source (rocks). The pattern of a gravity anomaly map is a powerful indicator of how subsurface rocks and formations are distributed. It can provide rapid indications of trends, grain and discontinuities.

12

MarzCorp Oil & Gas Inc.

Interpretation Report, Matapedia Project

The shape of individual anomalies can be used to determine the shape and position of density contrasts. In theory, there are a number of geometries that will “fit” a particular anomaly. In practice, by using realistic geological or other geophysical controls, anomaly “fits” will provide real numerical constraints on the anomaly sources.

3.2 Simple Shapes Modelling

Often, interpreters generally compare gravity anomalies to anomalies associated with simple shapes. A gravity anomaly is not especially sensitive to minor variations in the shape of the anomalous mass, so that simple shapes (sphere, horizontal rod, vertical cylinder, thin sheet, horizontal sheet, slabs, dyke and faults) yield results that are close enough to be useful (Telford et al., 1995). 3.3 Inversion of Gravimetric Anomalies: 2.5-D Modelling When we interpret gravity data we attempt to discover what sorts of mass distributions might create the anomaly we are considering (Goodacre, 1996). To gain insight into this process, it is helpful to turn the problem around and see how one calculates the gravitational attraction of a given mass distribution. Using Newton’s law of gravitation and the representation of the distance between two points in space as a vector, it is easy to show that the numerical calculation of the gravitational attraction of a body, given the mass distribution, is a relatively straight-forward problem. Unfortunately, the inverse problem of finding the density distribution given the gravitational attraction, which is the practical problem we have to deal with, is much more complicated. The inverse problem is simplified considerably, however, if we are able to specify the geometry of the gravity anomaly source. In this case, we can use the method of (linear) least-squares. By forward gravity modelling, we mean calculating the gravity anomaly due to a body in which we have specified its shape, size and density distribution and comparing the calculated anomaly to an observed gravity profile. If the fit between the calculated and observed profiles is not good, we try to improve the fit by changing the shape and/or size of the body as well as the distribution of density within. If and when we achieve a satisfactory fit, we can say that our model is a possible representation of the geological structure. Because of fundamental problems of non- uniqueness in gravity (and magnetic) interpretation, we cannot say that it is the only model. This technique also works in the case of the magnetic method and more details are presented in section 4.5.3. 3.4 Other Interpretation Techniques It is important here to note that performance techniques involving spectral analysis, presented in section 4.5.1 regarding the magnetic method, also applies to gravity data and was used when their interpretation. The reader is requested to refer to this section for its description.

13

MarzCorp Oil & Gas Inc.

Interpretation Report, Matapedia Project

4.0 THE AEROMAGNETIC TECHNIQUE 4.1 Introduction

The magnetic method is one of the oldest geophysical methods in use today. Development of fluxgate airborne systems started in the thirties at the Gulf Research labs. Wartime saw intensified development of the unit for Magnetic Anomaly Detector use in submarine detection. The first aeromagnetic survey was flown in 1947, in northern Ontario, Canada by the company Gulf Co. This survey resulted in the discovery of a magnetite deposit in Boston Twp. Since this first discovery, the magnetic method contributed to discover number of mines exploited around the world. The main earth magnetic field could be compared to a magnetic magnet bar located at the earth centre and oriented in accordance with the magnetic pole axis (Figure 6). This magnet generates a dipolar field, which act as an inductive field. The earth field anomaly consists of that part of the field which is caused by irregularities in the distribution of magnetized material in the earth outer crust. The whole purpose of magnetic prospecting is to measure the anomaly field and to attempt to interpret the magnetic in- homogeneities indicated in terms of geologic detail relevant to the occurrence mining deposit or accumulation of petroleum. Susceptibility is the fundamental rock parameter in magnetic prospecting. It is defined by the property of certain material to become magnetized in presence of a magnetic inductive field. Magnetic responses of rocks and minerals are determined by the amounts and susceptibilities of magnetic materials in them. Most minerals present null or very low magnetic susceptibilities, except magnetite (Fe3O4) and some other less abundant minerals (ilménite, hematite, pyrrhotite, franklinite, chromite, arsenopyrite, limonite, pyrite). Fortunately, magnetite is found in almost rocks in variable quantity and a fraction of 1% can be detected. Also, regionally, for the same geologic formation, magnetite grade tend to be approximately constant. Raw field data collected in digital form during an airborne magnetic survey are subsequently edited, corrected for diurnal, leveled, gridded and contoured. Observed variations on the corrected Total Field Magnetic Intensity maps represent essentially the distribution of ferromagnetic minerals in different geologic formations. At this stage, it is possible to make a qualitative (identification of geologic contacts, faults, folds: section 4.4) or quantitative data interpretation (calculation of depths, dips and other geometric parameters of isolated magnetic sources: section 4.5).

14

MarzCorp Oil & Gas Inc.

Interpretation Report, Matapedia Project

Figure 6: The Earth’s Magnetic Field

4.2 Enhancement of Magnetic Grids From the corrected Total Field Magnetic Intensity grids T , it is possible to calculate First and Second Vertical Derivatives (dT/dz and dT 2 /dz 2 ), horizontal derivatives (dT/dx and dT/dy), Reduction to Pole (RTP) and Analytic Signal maps. These filters are obtained by transforming Total Field Magnetic Intensity grids into the frequency domain, applying a transform function, and then transforming it back into the spatial domain. First and Second Vertical Derivatives behave somewhat like high-pass filters. They accentuate subtle changes in the Total Magnetic Field Intensity maps by suppressing long-wavelength regional components and reducing effects of interference between adjacent anomalies. Contributions of magnetic components coming from deeper geological units are reduced and both surface cultural noise and rock/intra-sedimentary anomalies are amplified. These maps are used in a qualitative manner to determine locations of source-body edges (Blakely, 1995).

15

MarzCorp Oil & Gas Inc.

Interpretation Report, Matapedia Project

The RTP is a fundamental transformation required to interpret aeromagnetic data. The RTP operator converts Total Magnetic Field Intensity anomalies recorded in latitudes where the Earth’s magnetic field is inclined to what they would be at the magnetic pole, where the field is vertical This results in a more geometrically realistic portrayal of the data and generally facilitates a more precise interpretation of structures and contacts. The Analytic Signal (A(x,y) is obtained from both horizontal and vertical derivatives of the Total Magnetic Field Intensity. Its amplitude is remarkable in that it allows one to obtain a signal that is independent of the source magnetization direction.

1/2

   

   

2

2

  2

  

   + 

dT dx

dT dy

dT dz

( , ) = 

  +

A x y





For a geological contact we know that: -

The anomaly shape is symmetrical;

- - -

The shape is also independent of magnetization and induction vectors;

The maximum indicates the edge of the contact;

Depth ( h ) depends on the width of the anomaly at its half-amplitude x½ : - Depth of a Geological contact: x½ = 3.46 h - Depth of a thin dike: x½ = 2 h - Depth of a horizontal cylinder: x½ = 1.53 h There are finally several other useful filters, as the Downward or Upward Continuation , Automatic Gain Correction (AGC) , or even the Magnetic Tilt . 4.3 The Aeromagnetic Prospection Magnetic prospecting consist to identify and map different geological units, potential deposits, hydrocarbons traps...by using local variations they produce in the Earth's magnetic field. Maps of the RTP residual magnetic field (as well as all other maps obtained from previous filters) represent images in high resolution of the magnetic properties of the different units and geological structures, serving as a guide to the geologist in its geological and structural mapping work. Even if the presence of magnetic minerals can be easily detected by the magnetometer, it is generally impossible to assess the economic opportunities of a deposit based on magnetic data alone. Magnetite has a greatly superior susceptibility than all the other ferric materials and magnetic maps reflect above all his concentration. Thus, a small amount of magnetite in a non- magnetic environment can give a much more intense magnetic anomaly than a mining deposit. 4.4 Qualitative Data Interpretation Magnetic anomalies can be produced by a number of causative features such as lithology changes, variations in thickness of magnetic units, faulting, folding, and topographic relief.

16

MarzCorp Oil & Gas Inc.

Interpretation Report, Matapedia Project

Generally, basic rocks contain more magnetite than acid rocks. Although there is no panacea to relate susceptibility to lithology, certain trends are evident. For example, sedimentary rocks have the lowest average susceptibility and basic igneous rocks have the highest; gabbros and ultrabasic rocks are generally more magnetic than granitic rocks. However, for a particular rock, the magnetic susceptibility is variable and it exist a wide overlap between different rock types. In every case, the susceptibility depends only on the amount of ferromagnetic minerals present, mainly magnetite, sometimes titano-magnetite or pyrrhotite. For a particular body, strike and dip of the body, and the inclination of the magnetic field will change drastically the shape of the magnetic anomaly. The interpreter must have a mental image in order to relate magnetic anomalies to rock bodies. This observable fact incites geophysicists to pole-reduce data before beginning both qualitative and quantitative interpretation. Pole-reduced data are easier to interpret since the shape of anomalies can be more easily related to the underlying geology, the effect of overlapping anomalies is reduced and anomalies are centered over bodies with vertical sides. Once pole reduced, the effect of the body dip can be easily illustrated because the anomaly is not much changed by strike. Figure 7 takes a particular body (the infinitely long thin sheet) and shows anomaly shapes for different dips at magnetic inclination of 90 o (from Reford, 1964). Figures 8 and 9 show examples of different magnetic signatures of some formations and geological structures.

17

MarzCorp Oil & Gas Inc.

Interpretation Report, Matapedia Project

10

8

6

4

2

0

2 3 1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1

1 2

3

-2

-4

-6

CÔTÉ SUD CÔTÉ NORD

HÉMISPHÈRENORD HÉMISPHÈRESUD

CÔTÉ NORD CÔTÉ SUD

PENDAGE 0°

45°

90°

45°

DISTANCE HORIZONTALE EN UNITÉ DE PROFONDEUR

INCLINATION 90°

Figure 7: Total Magnetic Field Anomaly Shapes (Field Inclination: 90 o )

18

MarzCorp Oil & Gas Inc.

Interpretation Report, Matapedia Project

Fault

Dike

Vertical Gradient

RTP Total Magnetic Field

Faults and Dike, Northern Quebec 0 1 km

Basanites

Metamorphic Aureole

Granite

Depth Anomaly

Vertical Gradient

RTP Total Magnetic Field

Intrusion and Metamorphic Aureole, Central Moroco 0 10 20 km

Figure 8: Qualitative Interpretation Exemples (Fault, Dike, Intrusion)

19

MarzCorp Oil & Gas Inc.

Interpretation Report, Matapedia Project

Fold

Faults

Vertical Gradient Total Field Faulted Geological Fold, Volcano-sedimentary Rock; Repulse Bay, Canada 8 km Figure 9: Qualitative Interpretation Exemples (Faulted Geological Fold) 4.5 Quantitative Data Interpretation In principle, the depth of investigation of a magnetic survey is very high. Depending on its importance (size and susceptibility contrast), a deposit containing ferromagnesian minerals could be detected up to several kilometres deep. Only the temperature of the rock will limit the depth of investigation. Because, it is well known, this temperature increase with depth, and for a ferromagnetic material, Curie Point (Tc) is defined as being the temperature at which the material loses its magnetization. This phase transition is reversible; the material recovers its ferromagnetic properties when the temperature drops below the Curie Point. For iron, the Curie Point equals 770°C. 4.5.1 Spectral Analysis A grid of aeromagnetic data is a discrete representation of a continuous function. Frequency content of a data grid can be described in terms of spatial frequency in units of radian/sampling interval or as its wavenumber in units of cycles/sampling interval. From the fundamental sampling theorem (Hall, 1979), it can be shown that the highest resolvable wavenumber, called the Nyquist wavenumber, that can be expressed in a square grid is equal to one half the grid spacing. The Nyquist wavenumber is important because any higher wavenumber in the measured field will be reflected, or aliased, back into the frequency spectrum as a lower wavenumber. The possible range 0 4

20

MarzCorp Oil & Gas Inc.

Interpretation Report, Matapedia Project

of wavenumber on a grid is therefore from 0, for a non-oscillating or constant component, to 0.5 cycles/grid cell, the Nyquist wavenumber. For example, if we have a grid with a grid cell of 250 metres, the Nyquist wavenumber will be 0.5 cycle/250 metres (2 cycle/km). A data grid can be transferred to the spatial frequency, or wavenumber domain, by the application of a 2-dimensional Fourier Transform to the data. All of the information in the original grid is present in the transformed frequency domain grid but it is described in terms of its frequency components instead of position. In practice the transform is done using faster algorithms, called the fast Fourier Transform (FFT). The complex wavenumber spectrum F(u,v), which results from the application of a Fourier Transform, can be analyses more easily by calculating the energy spectrum: E(u,v) = a 2 + b 2 (1) where: a = real part of F(u,v) containing amplitude information b = imaginary part of F(u,v) containing phase information The power spectrum of airborne magnetometer total field data can be used to determine average depth values of buried magnetic rocks located at different depths (Spector, 1967; Spector and Grant, 1970; Battacharya, 1966). These depths are established from slopes of the log-power spectrum at the lower end of the total wavenumber, or spatial frequency band. The method is based on the assumption that the magnetic effect of the basement surface can be simulated by an uncorrelated distribution of blocks of varying depth, width, thickness, and magnetization. On the log-power spectrum plot, if a group of blocks has a similar depth, they will fall into a line of constant slope. Thus, if there are groups of blocks with individual groups at widely different depths, such as shallow volcanic over a deep basement, the plot will be separable into parts with different slopes and the magnitude of the slope is a measure of depth. Figure 10 shows an example of energy spectrum. The depth of the different surfaces is obtained from the slope of each of line segments using the following equation (Cowan, 1993): Depth = Slope /4 π (2) The method has its application primarily in evaluation of general conditions over broad areas and to give relatively objective separation of the sharp and broad anomalies in such a way that multiple depth zones could be recognized. It is not applicable to the determination of depths of individual anomalies, as used for mapping a basement surface, but gives an objective confirmation of the general depth of such a surface. The energy spectrum E(u,v) shows the spectral energy distribution of the data in terms of its wavenumber composition.

21

MarzCorp Oil & Gas Inc.

Interpretation Report, Matapedia Project

Used Model Vertical prism of infinite length. The FFT treatment involves a very large number of these prisms with different susceptibilities and depths.

Depth

Figure 10: Example of Power Spectrum

22

MarzCorp Oil & Gas Inc.

Interpretation Report, Matapedia Project

4.5.2 Depth Calculation of a Dike with Peters’s Technique We assume a dipping dike with infinite longitudinal and depth extents and presenting the characteristics shown on the sketch below:

Where:

- - - -

m = dike half-width

h = depth to the top of the dike

n = m/h

x= X/h where X is the distance relative to the dike centre This dike will produce a magnetic anomaly like the one presented below:

The x i /2 points represent the X-coordinates where the slope of the curve is equal to half the maximum slope. The maximum slope is obtained at the inflexion points, i.e. where the first derivative equal zero. It could be mathematically demonstrated (Peters, 1949) that the half-slope points are only a function of two geometric parameters: the dike half-width and the dike depth. This function specifies that the dike depth can be obtained by the following expression: h = (x ½, 1 - x ½, 2 ) / n (3) To estimate the parameter « n », we observe the shape of the anomaly curve:

23

MarzCorp Oil & Gas Inc.

Interpretation Report, Matapedia Project

- If the curve is acute and the inflexion points are located near the summit, n = 1.2 - If the curve is moderately acute and the inflexion points are located near the curve centre, n = 1.6 - If the curve presents a clear flat summit, n = 2.0 4.5.3 2.5-D Modelling The interpretation of magnetic data involving computer modelling programs exists since computers allow us to do so. Most of the time, the geometry of infinite polygon of "n" sides (2-D model) is adjusted by successive iterations in order to satisfy the data collected (curve-fitting). In our case, a more elaborate model, developed by Talwani and Heirtzler (1964), was used. The lateral extension of the polygon is no more infinite and it is said that the model is two-dimensional and a half (2.5D). The mathematical expressions of a 2.5D polygon have been developed by Shuey and Pasquale (1973, equation 19, p.510). To fit the theoretical curve of the model on the measured data, the geometry of the polygon is gradually changed, either manually or by successive iterations (semi- automatic mode) using the non-linear least-squares method (Powell, 1965). At sections 6.2.2.3and 6.3.2.3, the MAGIX-XL modelling program, developed by Interpex Ltd (Colorado), was used to interpret gravity and magnetic data on a section named A-A' on the interpretation maps (Figures 34 and 35 of Annex A). 5.1 Seismic Transects and Drill Holes In the Val-Brillant area, south of the Shickshocks Fault , shallow continuous coring drilling works were carried out by the following companies: Prospection 2000 (well 1999FC121), Corridor Resources (well 1996FC119) and S.P.P.G (well 2000FC123). These works allowed confirming that crude oil (54 APIº) has elapsed from open fractures (Morin et al., 2001). Following the discovery of these new indices, the Québec Ministry of Natural Resources conducted a geological mapping campaign on the sectors west and centre of the Gaspé Peninsula (Brisebois, Morin et al., 1999). Of more, 2D seismic reflection data were acquired on 4 transects (VB-06, 04-A, B-04 and 04-C, see Figure 11) allowing building the Sayabec-Roncevaux transect with a length of 55 km. This transect crosses the Connecticut Valley-Gaspé Synclinorium and cuts, to the North, the Shickshocks South Fault , and to the South, the Causapscal and Sainte-Florence Faults (Morin and Laliberté, 2001). Although the Sayabec-Roncevaux transect does not overlap any oil wells, which would allow precise identification of the subsurface stratigraphy, the seismo-stratigraphic approach was used to assess the geological backbone by using the following information: 5.0 OTHER AVAILABLE DATA

24

MarzCorp Oil & Gas Inc.

Interpretation Report, Matapedia Project

- Speed contrasts obtained from sonic logs carried out on 1967FC086, 1969FC088 and 1972FC090 wells, located in the immediate area of the survey (see Figure 11 for locations and Figure 13 for the 1967FC086 and 1969FC088 logs) - Surface lithological mapping of contacts (Figure 4). From this analysis, it was possible to recognize the seismic signature of the subsurface stratigraphy sequence (Figures 12 and 14). This stratigraphic sequence is divided into four lithological assemblages (Morin and Laliberté, 2001). Resting unconformably on the Cambro-Ordovician ( Dunnage Zone ?), the Cabano Group a nd the Matapedia Group (?), age Late-Ordovician and Early-Silurian, are composed mainly of deep- water facies characterized by fine grained silicoclastic and carbonate (?). The Cabano Group was recognized only in the Témiscouata area. It was introduced in the Matapedia Valley following the analysis of the seismic survey and the accommodation space available to add sedimentary sequences under the Chaleurs Group . The latter contains shallow to deep shelf facies of Silurian to early Devonian ages and characterizes most of the seismic signatures. The Chaleur Group rests unconformably or in fault-contact over the Cambro-Ordovician ( Humber Zone ). Overcoming the Chaleurs Group, the Gaspé Superior Limestones and its lateral counterpart, the Fortin Group , exposed to the South of the Sainte-Florence Fault , consist of siliciclastic facies and platform and deep basin clay carbonates of early Devonian age. The Sayabec-Roncevaux transect established very clearly the structural complexity of the West segment of the Connecticut Valley-Gaspé Synclinorium (see the seismic transect schematic interpretation, Figure 14). The first noticeable structure is the possible outline of a triangular area. It is expressed by a huge envelope characterizing an amalgamation of the presumed Sayabec-Val- Brillant formations (high amplitude, more or less continuous, low-frequencies). On the VB 04-C segment, there is the presence of a beam, ascribed to the Sayabec-Val-Brillant formations, on the southern flank of the Lac Mitis Syncline characterizing the beginning of this triangular area. Moreover, within this envelope, several structures are observed. More in depth on the VB 06, 04-A and 04-C segments, a likely presumed contact between Humber and Dunnage Zones is observed. The alleged Humber Zone includes a multitude of more or less continuous seismic signatures with good amplitudes. On the other hand, the Dunnage Zone shows significant losses of seismic signatures corresponding probably to volcanic or ophiolitic (?) rocks. The contact (suture) between the Humber and Dunnage Zones can be traced on the seismic transect, manifesting itself through a fault reaching the surface. However, this fault seems not to be the Shickshocks Fault but may correspond to another fault located farther to the north. Petroleum Reservoir Potential Positive results achieved in wells 1999FC121, 1996FC119 and 2000FC123, the geological works and the Sayabec-Roncevaux 2D-seismic reflection transect suggest that the sector is very favourable to the presence of hydrocarbons at depths between 1 500 to 5 000 metres. In particular, on the transect VB-04C (Figure 11), a direct indicator of the presence of hydrocarbons is observed

25

MarzCorp Oil & Gas Inc.

Page 1 Page 2 Page 3 Page 4 Page 5 Page 6 Page 7 Page 8 Page 9 Page 10 Page 11 Page 12 Page 13 Page 14 Page 15 Page 16 Page 17 Page 18 Page 19 Page 20 Page 21 Page 22-23 Page 24 Page 25 Page 26 Page 27 Page 28 Page 29 Page 30 Page 31 Page 32 Page 33 Page 34-35 Page 36 Page 37 Page 38-39 Page 40 Page 41 Page 42 Page 43 Page 44-45 Page 46-47 Page 48 Page 49 Page 50 Page 51 Page 52 Page 53 Page 54 Page 55 Page 56 Page 57 Page 58 Page 59 Page 60 Page 61 Page 62 Page 63 Page 64-65 Page 66-67 Page 68-69 Page 70-71 Page 72-73 Page 74-75 Page 76-77 Page 78-79 Page 80-81 Page 82-83

Made with FlippingBook - professional solution for displaying marketing and sales documents online