| 
					
					
					 POTASH basicS Potash
				refers to potassium compounds and potassium-bearing minerals,
				the most common being potassium chloride. The distinguishing
					characteristic of potash minerals on well logs is their
					relatively high radioactivity, due to the potassium-40
					isorope, and their relatively low density compared to other
					common sedimentary rocks.
 
 The term
				"potash" comes from the old method of making potassium carbonate  by leaching wood ashes and evaporating the solution in
				large iron pots, leaving a white residue called "pot ash".
 
			Later, "potash" became the term widely applied to naturally
				occurring potassium salts and the commercial product derived
				from them. The main potash salts are sylvite, Carnallite,
			langbeinite, and polyhalite, mixed in varying concentrations with halite (rock salt). The main use of potash is as fertilizer.
 
			
					
			 Sylvinite is the most important ore for the production of potash
			in North America. It is a mechanical mixture of sylvite (KCl, or
			potassium chloride) and halite (NaCl, or sodium chloride). Most
			Canadian operations mine sylvinite with proportions of about 31% KCl
			and 66% NaCl with the balance being insoluble clays, anhydrite, and
			in some locations carnallite. 
 Sylvinite ores are beneficiated by
			flotation, dissolution,-recrystallization, "heavies" separations,
			or combinations of these processes.
 
			 The major source of potash
			in the world is from
			the Devonian Prairie Evaporite Formation in Saskatchewan, which
			provides 11 million tons per year. Russia is second at 6.9 million
			and the USA (mostly from New Mexico) at 1.2 million tons per year. A
			dozen other countries in Europe, Middle East, and South America
			produce potash from evaporite deposits. Potash can be mined mechanically
			by underground machinery or by solution mining using ambient or
			warmed water. Halite (salt) for human  use or road de-icing
			can be mined the same ways. Potash ores contain halite as well, so
			the by-product of potash extraction is road salt. In earlier times,
			salt was more valuable per ounce than gold, as it was essential to
			human life. A person "worth his salt" was one who contributed his
			fair share to the community.
 
 
 
  Potash
			prices have undergone a flurry of variation since 2005, after many
			years of relatively stable values. A perceived shortage of supply
			moved the price from around $200 per tonne to nearly $900 per tonne,
			falling quickly to the $300 to $500 range. The breakup of the
			Russian / Belerus potash cartel in 2012 pushed prices into the $300
			per tonne range and by 2014 appeared to be stabilized near this
			value. The future is unpredictable. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
			
					 PROPERTIES OF POTASH Minerals 
  Potassium is radioactive so the gamma ray log is used to
				identify potash bearing zones. Potash minerals have distinctive
				physical properties on other logs, so conventional multi-mineral
				models can be used to determine the mineral mixture, just as we
				do in carbonates in the oil and gas environment. 
			  
			For
				consistency, potash ore and fertilizer concentrations are rated
				by their equivalent K2O content. Some literature can be
				confusing because they rate the ore by its potassium content (K)
				or potassium chloride content (KCl), The table below lists the
				physical properties of potash minerals, including K and K2O
				values. The GR (API units) entry in the table do not seem to
			match any known correlation, so some caution is urged. 
			  
 
  | POTASH MINERAL PROPERTIES -- FRESH MUD |  
  | Mineral | PHIN | DENS | DTC | DTC | PE | Uma | Mlith | Nlith | Alith | Klith | Plith | GR | K2O | K | Formula |  
  |  | Ls | g/cc | us/m | us/ft | barns | cu | frac | frac | frac | frac | frac | Gapi | frac | frac |  |  
  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  
  | Water | 1.000 | 1.00 | 656 | 200 | 0.10 | 0.10 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  
  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  
  | Halite | -0.010 | 2.03 | 220 | 67.1 | 4.72 | 9.58 | 1.291 | 0.981 | 1.020 | 1.316 | 4.583 | 0 | 0.000 | 0.000 | NaCl |  
  | Sylvite | -0.041 | 1.86 | 242 | 73.8 | 8.76 | 16.29 | 1.468 | 1.210 | 0.826 | 1.213 | 10.186 | 953 | 0.630 | 0.524 | KCl |  
  | Carnallite | 0.584 | 1.56 | 256 | 78.0 | 4.29 | 6.69 | 2.178 | 0.743 | 1.346 | 2.932 | 7.661 | 255 | 0.170 | 0.141 | KMgCl3●6H2O |  
  | Langbeinite | -0.020 | 2.82 | 170 | 52.0 | 3.56 | 10.04 | 0.813 | 0.560 | 1.784 | 1.451 | 1.956 | 342 | 0.226 | 0.188 | K2SO4Mg2(SO4)2 |  
  | Polyhalite | 0.150 | 2.79 | 188 | 57.5 | 4.32 | 12.05 | 0.796 | 0.475 | 2.106 | 1.676 | 2.413 | 235 | 0.155 | 0.130 | K2SO4Mg(SO4)(Ca(SO4))2●2H2O |  
  | Kainite | 0.300 | 2.12 | 213 | 65.0 | 3.50 | 7.42 | == | 0.625 | 1.600 | == | 3.125 | 285 | 0.189 | 0.156 | KMg(SO4)Cl·3H2O |  
  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  
			  
			The GR values shown above will vary with tool type and calibration
			is performed only at low GR flux (about 200 - 250 API units). Quoted
			values for sylvite are >500, 753, 953, 1046. A correlation between
			sylvite or K2O content should be done to calibrate a particular tool
			type whenever possible. GR values for the other minerals can be
			prorated based on their K or K2O content.
 
 
				Actual sonic travel time in halite and sylvite may be
				slightly higher than shown above due to occluded water. The Vp/Vs
				ratio for most salts is close to 1.9 so shear travel time is
				close to 1.9 times compressional travel time. 
 The above physical properties are used in the standard 2- and
				3-mineral models, simultaneous equation models, and
				multi-mineral probabilistic models. Choose the mineral mix to
				match the actual mineralogy as described in cores or samples.
				Add clay or quartz to account for insolubles and occluded water
				if enough independent log curves are available.
 
 
 
				
					 REFERENCES: 1. Quantitative Log Evaluation of the Prairie Evaporite
						Formation of Saskatchewan
 E. R. Crain,
			P.Eng., W.B. Anderson,
			P.Eng.
 Journal of Canadian Petroleum Technology, Quebec City
						and Edmonton, Jul-  Sep, 1966
 
  As published, 1966 
  As written with legible illustrations, 1964 
  Program for IBM 1620, 1964 
 2. Defining Evaporite Deposits with Electrical Well Logs
 R. P. Alger, E. R. Crain,
			P.Eng.
 Trans Northern Ohio Geological Society - Second
						Symposium on Salt, Cleveland, 1966
 
  
 3. Potash Redux
 E. R. Crain, P.Eng., CWLS InSite, Dec 2010
 
   
 
				
 
  LOGGING IN POTASH WELLS 
				The minimum logging program for a potash interval is gamma
				ray and a neutrom log. A sonic, density, and PE logs are useful
				in assessing accessory minerals. A resistivity log is usually
				required elsewhere in the rest of the wellbore so it is usually
				run in combinatation with the others. Here are some examples. 
				  
				
				 Example  of a 1964 gamma ray neutron log from Saskatchewan.
				Note the primary GR with 2 backup curves in Track 1. This is
				hard to use quantitatively, so an alternative GR dis]lay was
				common before the digital era, as shown below.
 
 
  . Example  of a 1964 3-track gamma ray log presentation,
				common before the digital era. GR scale is 0 to 600 API units. Log data values picked from these
				logs are used to create a transform relating the log data to
				core assay data. An example of such a transform is shown later
				on this webpage.
 
 
  Example gamma ray and neutron log from Saskatchewan showing
				halite, sylvite, Carnallite, and clay responses. In the
				exploration heyday in Saskatchewan in the 1960's, we presented
				the gamma ray across 3 tracks of the log, giving a scale of 0 to
				450 or 0 to 600 API units across 7.5 inches of paper. This was
				sufficient resolution for accurate evaluation and eliminated the
				need for GR backup curves cramped into Track 1.
 
 
				
				
  1970's era logs in a potash interval in New Mexico. Visual
				analysis is based on review of the four log
 curves: GR, sonic, neutron, and density.
 
 
				
 
 
  POTASH MINERAL IDENTIFICATION FROM CROSSPLOTS Crossplots of well log data have been used
				for many years in the oil, gas, and sedimentary mineral
				industries. A number are shown below -- they are not found in
				standard service company chartbooks.
 
 The most useful is a crossplot of gamma ray versus neutron
				porosity. Commercial potash ores are anhydrous (no water of
				hydration), such as sylvite and langbeinite, so the neutron log
				reads near zero. Hydrated potash minerals will have non-zero
				neutron response, such as Carnallite, polyhalite, and kainite.
				High gamma ray response distinguishes all these minerals from
				other zero porosity minerals, such as halite and anhydrite, and
				from porous minerals, such as calcite, dolomite and clay.
 
 Potash beds seldom contain pure minerals; usually they are made
				of a mixture of one or more potash minerals with halite. Thus
				data points will fall on trend lines joining the pure mineral
				points. The best examples are the Potash Identification Plots (PID
				plots) contained in "Simple Screening Technique for Identifying
				Commercial Potash", by Donald G. Hill Ph.D., AAPG,
				2019. Here are some examplws.
 
				
    PID Plots for Prairie Evaporite in Saskatchewan (left) and
				Windsor Salt jn Nova Scotia (right). Both show data points along
				the near vertical Sylvite - Langbeinite - Halite trend line,
				indicating commercial grade potash ore. Only the Saskatchewan
				example shows some data trending toward the non-commercial
				Carnallite data point. Note that the GR scale on the vertical
				axis is for a moden logging tool with a linerar response. For
				older tools, the Y-axis could be replaced with a K2O axis,
				derived from the original Crain non-linerar relationship.
 
 
    The Michigan Basin example (left) shows only commercial grade
				potash ore in this well. The New Mexico example (right) shows
				only non-commercial ore in this well.
 
 
				The following crossplot illustrations were derived from the
				well logging literature.
 
				 Gamma ray and K2O content versus density crossplot of evaporite minerals
				used for mineral identification. Note that the GR scale is
				non-linear based on Crain's correlation of 1960's era logs;
				modern GR logs are linear beyond 1000 API units and require a
				different calibration to K2O content.
 
 
  Density versus K2O fs and Sonic versus Neutron Crossplots for some
				potash minerals.
 
 
 
 
					
					
					
			 POTASH ANALYSIS - OLDER LOGS 
				 Since
				potassium is radioactive, the K2O content can be derived from
				gamma ray logs, and this technique has been used since the
				1960's. In 1964, I was stationed in Lanigan, Saskatchewan to run
				logs in potash exploration wells. While there, I scrounged a
				personal tour of the Esterhazy potash mine, then only two years
				old. This was the first and only time I have seen geological
				structure and stratigraphy from the "inside" of the rock. Truly
				amazing! 
				  
				No direct calibration between GR and K2O had been developed up to that time, so I convinced a
				client to let me see his core assay data. After adjusting for
				hole size, mud weight, and bed thickness, a reasonable relationship was found,
				and was published as "Quantitative Log Evaluation of the Prairie Evaporite
						Formation of Saskatchewan" by E. R. Crain and W. B. Anderson,
                          Journal of Canadian Petroleum Technology, July--September, 1966.  
				  
				The work was subsequently reprinted in
				five other papers by various authors, some included updates as
				tool technology evolved. The original GR correlation was
				unchanged, widely distributed,
				and was the standard for potash analysis from oilfield style
				logs run prior to the era of
				digital logs in the 1980's. Most analog oil field GR logs were
				non-linear above about 300 API units due to dead time in the counting
				circuit. These older logs are still available in the well files
				and were recently used by Saskatchewan Industry and Resources to
				update their potash isopach and ore grade maps. 
				  
				
				 K2O versus Gamma Ray relationship for analog
				Schlumberger tools circa 1960 - 1975, run in open hole with oil
				based mud. Tools from other service
				companies may differ. Correlation between log and core assay
				data for specific cases is strongly recommended. Modern gamma
				ray logs respond in a more linear fashion and slope may be
				different due to more efficient detectors.
 
				  
				
					
						| 
						
						K2O from GRc |  
						| 
						
						GR API | 
						
						K20 |  
						| 
						
						0 | 
						
						0.0 |  
						| 
						
						45 | 
						
						2.5 |  
						| 
						
						90 | 
						
						5.0 |  
						| 
						
						135 | 
						
						7.5 |  
						| 
						
						175 | 
						
						10.0 |  
						| 
						
						220 | 
						
						12.5 |  
						| 
						
						265 | 
						
						15.0 |  
						| 
						
						310 | 
						
						17.5 |  
						| 
						
						355 | 
						
						20.0 |  
						| 
						
						400 | 
						
						22.5 |  
						| 
						
						435 | 
						
						25.0 |  
						| 
						
						470 | 
						
						27.5 |  
						| 
						
						505 | 
						
						30.0 |  
						| 
						
						530 | 
						
						32.5 |  
						| 
						
						550 | 
						
						35.0 |  
						| 
						
						565 | 
						
						37.5 |  
						| 
						
						580 | 
						
						40.0 |  
						| 
						
						590 | 
						
						42.5 |  
						| 
						
						600 | 
						
						45.0 |  
						| 
						
						605 | 
						
						47.5 |  
				
					 GAMMA RAY BOREHOLE CORRECTIONS The hole size and mud weight corrections derived from
				the data, and embedded in the above chart, were:
 1. GRh = GR * (1.0 +.0.05 * (HS - 6.0)) + (320 *
				(HS - 6.0)) / (GR + 100.0)
 2. GRc = GRh * (1.0 + 0.10 * (WM - 7.2))
 
				  
				Where:GR = gamma ray log reading (API)
 GRc = GR corrected for hole size and mud weight (API)
 GRh = GR corrected for hole size (API)
 HS = hole size (inches)
 
				  WM = mud weight (lb/gal) 
				  
				
				
					 POTASH ORE GRADE FROM GAMMA RAY K2O content was derived from GRc using the lookup table shown at
				the right. It is linear up to 400 API units and exponential
				thereafter. Values in the table represent a 6 inch borehole
				filled with diesel at 7.2 lb/gal. The linear portion of the
				lookup table is represented by:
 3: IF GRc <= 400
 4: THEN K2O = 0.05625 * GRc
 5: OTHERWISE Use Lookup Table
 
				  
				The slope in the above equation can be determined by
				correlation to core assay data for other hole sizes or other
				tool types. 
				  
				The non-linear relationship must be honoured while
				analyzing these older logs for potash. The effect is negligible
				for conventional oil field applications. Modern digital tools are linear up
				to about 1000 API units so the discussion in this Section does
				not apply.  
				  
				A 1967 paper showed a linear GR relationship up to
				650 API units for the McCullough tool, but its use was not
				widespread in Canada. That graph showed 600 API units was
				equivalent to 45% K2O, identical to my original data, but the
				slope of the line at lower GR readings was different. No mud
				weight correction was implied but a bed thickness correction
				similar to mine was presented. 
				  
				
				 In
				the analog era, GR logs were calibrated to a secondary standard
				based on the API GR test pit in Houston which contained an
				artificial radioactive formation defined as 200 API units in an
				8 inch borehole filled with 10 lb/gal mud. 
 However, there were
				no published borehole size or mud weight correction charts for
				the GR log. These effects are large enough to seriously
				compromise the correlation.
 
 
  BED THICKNESS ISSUES Bed thickness corrections are also
				needed for beds less than 3 feet thick (1 meter). This is
				true even for modern logs. The
				chart shown at the right illustrates the importance
				of normalizing the GR log for these factors. Unfortunately, my
				original data plots for this work were lost in the bowels of a
				Schlumberger shredder many years ago - it would have been nice
				to recalibrate the work with the power of non-linear regression
				in a good statistics package.
 
			  NON-OILFIELD GAMMA RAY TOOLS Many
			potash exploration wells in the USA and elsewhere were logged with
			slim hole GR tools intended for uranium work. While they may have
			been more linear, they were not usually calibrated to any standard,
			suffered from larger borehole effects, and were recorded in counts
			per second (cps). Specific correlations to core assay data on a well
			by well basis are required for these wells.
 
					 USING ANCIENT NEUTRON LOGS Due to the water of hydration
			associated with Carnallite, the neutron log is very useful for
			distinguishing between Carnallite and sylvite. High neutron count
			rates mean low hydrogen index, thus sylvite and not Carnallite.
 To quantify the relative amounts
			of Carnallite and sylvite, the neutron response must be converted to
			porosity from count rates using the standard semi-logarithmic
			relationship. A typical transform for a 1960's era Schlumberger
			tool is shown at the left. Charts for other tools can be found in ancient
			service company chart books. 
					With the advent of the
			sidewall neutron log in 1969 and later the compensated neutron log,
			this transform was no longer required.
				 
					 USING SONIC AND DENSITY LOGS Some wells were logged with sonic
			and/or density logs in addition to the neutron log, which also could
			be used quantitatively with the GR and neutron to provide a potash
			assay based on logs. This was important where core was lost or for
			regional exploration when core data, but not the logs, were
			proprietary. The logic behind these models is shown below. A later
			Section of this article deals with the use of more modern logs.
 
			
  POTASH  ModelS - OLDER LOGS My original computer program for potash analysis was written for
			the IBM 1620 in Regina in 1964. The model was based on four
			simultaneous equations that define the response of the available
			logs. Although this seems like a long time ago, nothing has changed
			except the improved tool accuracy. If you want to analyze the older
			log suites, here's how to do it.
 The
                minerals sought are halite (rock salt), sylvite, Carnallite, and
                insolubles or clay. The only logs available on old wells are
				resistivity, sonic, neutron, and total gamma ray. The
				resistivity is not a helpful discriminator, except as a shale
			bed indicator, so it is not used in the simultaneous solution.
				These evaporite beds contain potassium and ore grade is measured
				in units of potassium oxide (K2O). K20 is obtained from a gamma
				ray log, corrected for borehole size and mud weight, using a
				non-linear transform derived from core assay data. In middle
				aged wells, the density log is also helpful, and in modern wells
				the PE curve can be added. Further, the gamma ray response is
				linear on modern wells so the transform to K2O is not as
				difficult to obtain.
 The equations are:
 1.00 = Vsalt + Vsylv + Vcarn + Vclay
 K20 = 0.00 * Vsalt + 0.63 * Vsylv + 0.17 * Vcarn + 0.05 * Vclay
 PHIN = 0.00 * Vsalt + 0.00 * Vsylv + 0.65 * Vcarn + 0.30 * Vclay
 DTC = 67 * Vsalt + 74 * Vsylv + 78 * Vcarn + 120 * Vclay
 K2O is
			obtained, after borehole correcting the GR, from the equations and
			lookup table shown
			earlier, or from a fresh correlation based on specific data from the
			wells under study. Note that the chart and table given earlier are
			in percent K2O and this set of equations expects fractional units
			for K2O, neutron porosity, and all output volumes. Parameters in the
			sonic equation are in usec/ft. When
                solved by algebraic means, these equations become:1: Vclay = 0.0207 * DTC - 0.23 * K20 - 0.29 * PHIN - 1.3891
 2: Vcarn = 1.54 * PHIN - 0.46 * Vclay
 3: Vsylv = 1.59 * K20 - 0.41 * PHIN + 0.04 * Vclay
 4: Vsalt =  1.00 -
				Vclay - Vsylv - Vcarn
 
				These equations were derived with DELT in usec/ft. All constants
				will be different if DELT is in us/m. To
                convert from mineral fraction to K2O equivalent (K2O equivalent
                is the way potash ores are rated), the final analysis follows:5: K2Osylv = 0.63 * Vsylv
 6: K2Ocarn = 0.17 * Vcarn
 7: K2Ototal = K2Osylv + K2Ocarn
 
					 EFFECT OF OCCLUDED WATER If
                occluded water (V) is added to the desired results, the equations become:
 1.00 = Vwtr + Vsalt + Vsylv + Vcarn + Vclay
 Where
                Vwtr = PHIN value in pure salt above the zone of interest. The
                occluded water has zero gamma ray emission so the second equation
                remains unchanged:K20 = 0.00 * Vsalt + 0.63 * Vsylv + 0.17 * Vcarn + 0.05 * Vclay
 The
                porosity is read directly by the neutron log, hence, the third
                equation becomes:PHIN = 1.00 * Vwtr + 0.00 * Vsalt + 0.00 * Vsylv + 0.65 * Vcarn
				+ 0.30 * Vclay
 The
                sonic equation becomes:DELT = C + 67 * Vsalt + 74 * Vsylv + 78 * Vcarn + 120 * Vclay
 Where
                C = DELT in salt minus 67 usec/ft. Reduction
                of these equations results in:8:   Vclay = 0.0207 * (DELT - C) - 2.23 * K20 - 0.29 * (PHIN - V) - 1.3891
 9:   Vcarn = 1.54 * (PHIN - V) - 0.64 * Vclay
 10: Vsylv = 1.59 * K20 - 0.41 * (PHIN
				- V) - 0.04 * Vclay
 11: Vsalt = 1.00 - Vsylv - Vcarn - Vclay
				- Vwtr
 Conversion
                to K20 equivalent remains the same as before. Note that mineral
				fractions are in volume fractions. To convert to
				weight fraction, one more step is needed. By using the density
				of each mineral times the volume fraction, summing these to get
				the total rock weight, then dividing each individual weight by
				the rock weight, we get weight fraction of each. This allows
				comparison to core assay data which are reported in weight
				fraction or percent. The same math is used in tar sands and coal
				analysis to allow comparison to lab data.      
                12: WTclay = Vclay * 2.3513: WTcarn = Vcarn * 1.61
 14: WTsylv = Vsylv * 1.98
 15: WTsalt = Vsalt * 2.16
 16: WTwtr  = Vwtr * 1.10
 17: WTrock = WTclay + WTcarn + WTsylv + WTsalt +
				WTwtr
 Note
			that the densities in the above equations are the true density
			values, not the electron densities used in the original
			simultaneous equations.  Mass
			fraction or weight percent values are obtained b dividing individual
			weights by WTrock. foer example:18: Wsylv = WTsylv / WTrock
 19: Wcarn = WTcarn / WTrock
 20: WT%sylv = 100 * Wsylv
 21: WT%carn = 100 * Wcarn
 
 Where:
 Vxxx = volume fraction of a component
 WTxxx = weight of a component (grams)
 Wxxx = mass fraction of a component
 WT%xxx = weight percent of a component
 
					
  COMMENTS These
                equations show the use of constraints (Vwtr and C) on the otherwise
                linear simultaneous equations. The first set of equations is exactly
                determined, and the second set are underdetermined until Vwtr and
                C are defined.
 If
                the density or PE equation were added, then the set would be exactly
                determined and the strategy of finding Vwtr and C in the pure salt
                bed would not be needed. This work was done in Saskatchewan before
                density logs were common, so the density equation was not used
                at that time.  
					
					
					
			 POTASH MODELS - MODERN LOGS 
				With a modern suite of calibrated logs, we can use
				conventional multi-mineral models to calculate a potash assay.
				With GR, neutron, sonic, density, and PE, we can solve for
				halite, sylvite, Carnallite, clay (insolubles or shale
				stringers), and water (occluded in many salts as isolated
				pores). The potassium curve from a spectral gamma ray log might
				also prove useful, if the detector system is linear and does not
				saturate. Alternate mineral models are quite possible in other
				potash areas of the world. 
				  
				The mathematical methods are covered in the Lithology Chapters elsewhere
				in this Handbook. Matrix rock properties for the minerals were
				shown earlier in this article. Water is treated as a "mineral"
				so that it can be segregated from the water of hydration in
				Carnallite. 
				  
				Probabilistic analysis methods are also used with modern log
				suites. Here, the mineral mixture can be underdetermined,
				allowing the program to find the best mix at any particular
				depth point.  
				  
				 The
				first step is to correct the gamma ray for borehole and mud
				weight effects, using the appropriate service company correction
				charts. The other logs seldom need much correction as the potash
				is not deep or hot. However, if a water based mud was
				used, it will have a high salinity, so a salinity correction for
				the neutron log may be required. 
				  
				The second step is to confirm the GR to K2O correlation using
				any available potash core assay data. Since modern GR logs are
				more linear than older tools, the relationship should be a
				relatively straight line and can be extended beyond the
				available core data, as shown at the right. 
				  
				
					 SPECIAL CASES There are numerous situations which require special
				treatment. These include:
 
				  1. an incomplete open hole logging suite 
				  2. logs run through casing 
				  3. logs run with GR in counts per second  
				  4. logs run where thin beds predominate 
				  5. combinations of the above. 
				  
				
				
					 Incomplete Logging Suite 
				Here we must include fewer minerals in the model. Isolated
				water is easy to ignore, and insoluble clay comes next, although
				it is an important economic factor in the extraction process. In
				the worst case, we might need to settle for K2O from the gamma
				ray and a sylvite / Carnallite discriminator based on the neutron
				log. This situation occurs most often when potash geologists are
				using logs in wells drilled originally for oil or gas, in which
				potash evaluation was not considered as a priority. 
				  
				
					 Through Casing Logs 
				The most obvious problem will be to correct the gamma ray log
				for casing size and weight, cement sheath thickness, and
				borehole fluid weight using service company correction charts.
				Where core assay data is available from the well or from
				reasonably close offsets, the GR to K2O relationship can be
				confirmed. The second problem is usually an incomplete logging
				suite, as described above. If a through casing neutron log is
				available, scaled or not, a Carnallite flag can be created. 
				  
				
					 GR in Counts per Second Many potash wells are drilled as stratigraphic test wells
				and are not intended to be completed. They are often drilled as
				slim holes and slim hole GR logs must be run. Some of these logs
				may be calibrated to the API GR standard; many are not. In any
				case the GR to K2O correlation must be established for each tool
				type and adjusted if mud weight or borehole size varies between
				wells. Bear in mind that the core retrieved from a slim hole is
				volumetrically much smaller than full size cores. Variations
				between log and core data is expected to be somewhat larger in
				slim holes.
 
				  
				
					 Thin Bed Problems This issue affects all logs used for all purposes, but
				can seriously affect potash evaluation in areas where thin beds
				predominate. An approach was shown earlier using a bed thickness
				correction chart. Another approach is to correlate K2O times
				thickness to GR times thickness instead of a direct GR to K2O
				transform. This is best suited to hand picked data, as thickness
				is not so easily determined automatically in most log analysis
				software. The US Geological Survey published an example,
				originally developed by Jim Lewis of Intrepid Mining for a New
				Mexico case study. The pertinent crossplots from his work are
				shown below. The regression has much less scatter on the GR
				times thickness plots. This method was originally suggested in a
				1967 paper describing the use of McCullough GR logs for potash
				evaluation.
 
				  
				   GR in API units vs K20 (left) shows poor correlation due
				to thin bed effects. GR-thickness vs K2O-thickness products
				(right) correlate much better (regression lines not shown).
 
 
    Similar graphs for some USGS GR data in cps show that the GR-thickness
				product is a better predictor of potash content than GR by
				itself in thinly bedded potash zones..
 
				
					 Combinations of the Above 
  It
				would be unusual if there were no problems to solve. Logs run in
				different areas by a variety of service companies need to be
				normalized to some single standard. Borehole and casing effects
				need to be handled first. Then normalizing oilfield and strat
				hole gamma ray logs can be done by correlating potash beds
				between near offset wells. It would be nice if both wells also
				had core assay data but this is seldom the case. At right is a
				comparison of USGS log picks over 29 potash intervals showing
				the regression against the API units for the same zones in the
				nearest oilfield well. The equation of the line can be used to
				convert all USGS logs to API units in this particular project
				area. 
				Ancient GR logs could be rescaled with a non-linear transform
				to make them respond similarly to modern logs. Once the
				conversion is made, computer analysis is easier and cross
				sections look better.
 
 
  POTASH ANALYSIS EXAMPLES - OLDER LOGS A sample of computed results from this log analysis
				model compared to core data is shown below. The GR was borehole
				corrected but no bed thickness corrections were applied.
 
			 Example log analysis showing excellent match to core data (circa
			1964). Raw data is shown but note the scales are opposite polarity
			to normal.
 
 
  Another Saskatchewan example with sylvite, salt, and clay compared
			to core assay, grading to Carnallite near the base, normal log presentations.
 
			 Potash evaluation of 1960's logs with a modern log analysis program.
			The core gamma ray (dashed curve, Track 1) reads considerably higher
			than the open hole GR log (solid curve). Using Crain's original
			non-linear algorithms on the log data, results match core assay data
			(see data in K2OS and K2OC tracks). A linear transform would be
			needed to calibrate K2O from the core gamma curve.
 
 
				
					 POTASH ANALYSIS EXAMPLES - OLDER LOGS 
			  1990's example from the Windsor Salt formation in
			Nova Scotia. Note GR scale is 0 to 800 API units, shaded when curve
			is greater than 160 API units. Image courtesy of Don Hill, JAG Vol
			30, 1993.
 
			 Modern logs from Germany run with a
			probabilistic analysis model.
 
			  |