Disc Contents © IPA, 2006 - Sedimentation in the Modern and Miocene Mahakam Delta, 1998

Contents

Search
CHAPTER 12 - Conclusion and References

Conclusion

During this field trip, participants have been shown parts of three different Mahakam Delta Systems:
(1) the Modern Mahakam Delta, (2) the Lower Miocene in the outcrops at Samarinda and (3) the
Middle Miocene Deltas in cores from the producing fields. It is the purpose of this final chapter to
discuss differences and similarities of these three delta systems and how such differences may be
detectable from the generally small amount of data available to the petroleum geologist. Although the
entire Neogene to Recent succession was deposited in generally similar environmental conditions,
certain modifications in depositional processes can be observed, in particular the nature of the fluvial
discharge. These have produced detectable changes in sedimentation and sedimentary facies. The
following paragraphs attempt to summarize the major sedimentary and reservoir characteristics of the
delta systems deposited in each of these time intervals.

Modern Mahakam Delta

The modern Mahakam Delta represents a single episode of deltaic progradation following the rapid
Holocene sea level rise which terminated approximately 5000 years ago. The modern delta is affected
by two very significant environmental and stratigraphic parameters: a non-flooding fluvial regime and
rapid and high amplitude sea level variations. In addition to these effects, since the Mid-Miocene, the
delta has been locked into the same position as a result of incision of the Mahakam River into the
uplifting coastal fold belt. This has considerably reduced the freedom of lateral migration of the delta
along the coastline, in addition to having modified the fluvial regime.

Area of delta plain: Approximately 1800 km2.

Distance to shelf break: 25 km from delta plain.
Fluvial discharge: Seasonal variations but no significant floods.
Tidal range: Mesotidal, up to 2.9 m.
Wave energy: Very low, wave ripples on mouthbars; detrital peat beaches but
no sand beaches on the delta.
Sediment input: Mixed sand:mud, with mud predominant; sand is well sorted,
fine to lower coarse gained, derived from mixed provenance:
Erosion of Samarinda Anticlinorium, Cretaceous Basement and
Pliocene volcanics.
Major features of hinterland: Mahakam River incised through Samarinda Anticlinorium, Kutei
Lakes in subsiding alluvial plain to west of coastal fold belt and
incised Mahakam River dampens progradation of floods to delta.
Major features of Delta: Lobate morphology with branching distributaries; rapid
progradation, 30 x 60 km delta plain formed in 5000 years.
Straight sandy distributary channels with meandering thalwegs
and lateral sand bars; mud filled meandering tidal channels. Tide
dominated delta plain consisting of carbonaceous mud covered
with Nipah palm and Mangrove in lower delta plain and
hardwood forest in the upper delta plain; no alluvial levees,
crevasse splays or active peat swamps. Detrital peat beaches on

219
 abandoned coasts; low energy mixed fluvial-tidal delta front with
extensive mouthbar sand deposits.
Reservoir types andgeomehy: Distributary channel fills: 7-15 metres thick, medium to lower
medium grained cross bedded clean to mud laminated sand
forming low sinuosity belts; Width to Thickness Ratio (W/T) =
80-120.
Channel-Mouth bars: 4-6 metres thick, fine to medium grained,
bioturbated sand; widespread triangular to irregular elliptical-
geometry (W/T > 1000).

Lower Miocene Deltaic Sediments in Samarinda Outcrops

Area of delta plain: Variable, probably exceeding the size of the modern Mahakam
Delta Plain, since the Mahakam River at that time was not
incised into a permanent position.
Distance to shelf break: Variable depending on delta progradation, from several km to
several tens of km.
Fluvial discharge: Variable, with strong floods; higher energy than present.
Tidal range: Micro to mesotidal, probably identical to present.
Wave energy: Similar to present, i.e. very low; wave ripples on mouthbars, but
no sand beaches or shoreface deposits on the delta.
Sediment input: Mixed sand:mud, mud predominant (sand estimated at
approximately 10-20%). Sand is generally well sorted, fine to
lower coarse grained, Localized conglomerates at base of
channels. Derived from mixed provenance of Oligocene to
Lower Miocene volcanics and, Cretaceous Basement (chert and
metamorphic fragments) and Palaeogene sediments.
Major features of hinterland: Uplifted central Borneo and erosion of large amounts of older
sedimentary material. No barrier to river flow from catchment
area to delta.
Majorfeatures of delta(s) 1 Rapid progradation across a large shelf area; probable lobate
morphology and branching distributary network; no obvious tidal
channels observed; high energy fluvial flood-dominated delta
plain with abundant levees and crevasse splays; extensive in situ
coal deposits; fluvial flood-dominant delta front with extensive
mouthbar sand deposits.
Reservoir types and geometry: Distributary channel-fills. 5-20 metres thick, medium to coarse
grained clean, cross-bedded and laterally accreted sand. Difficult
to estimate sand body size in the sub-surface. From outcrops in
coal mines W/T = approximately 100. Sand bodies amalgamated
in places into regional sheets up to 100 m thick extending along
strike over 10 km.
Crevasse splays: Thickness < 2 metres. Fine to.medium grained
sand with flood deposited structures. In outcrop, width up to 200
m observed.

220
 Channel-mouth bars: 1-4 metres thick; fine to medium grained
sand with flood deposited structures, width in coal mine sections
observed up to 1 km and possibly more. Some bar systems are
amalgamated. W/T > 1000.

Middle to Umer Miocene Section in cores

Area of delta plain: Variable, depending on progradation of delta; probably up to

several thousand square .kilometres
Distance to shelf break: Variable, depending on delta progradation, from several km to
several tens of kilometres.
Fluvial Discharge : Variable, with less significant floods than in the Lower Miocene;
somewhat higher energy than present.
Tidal range: Micro to mesotidal. Probably identical to present.
Wave Energy: Similar to present, i.e. very low; wave ripples on mouth bars, but
no sand beaches or shoreface deposits on the delta.
Sediment input: Mixed sand:mud, mud predominant, (sand estimated at
approximately 10-20%). Sand is well sorted, fine to lower coarse
grained, less conglomerate in channels than in the Lower
Miocene; derived from mixed provenance of Lower Miocene
deltaics from eroding Samarinda Anticlinorium and Cretaceous
and Palaeogene sediments in the hinterland.
Major Features of Hinterland: Mahakam River incised through Samarinda Anticlinorium.
Possible subsidence to the west of coastal fold belt and incised
Mahakam River forms lakes which attenuate alluvial floods
reaching delta. Uplifted central Borneo and inverted Lower
Miocene and older section.
Major features of Delta: Rapid progradation across a large shelf area; lobate morphology
and branching distributary network; no obvious tidal channels
observed; mixed fluvial-tidal delta plain with some alluvial flood
deposits; delta plain covered with Nipah palms and Mangrove
and hardwood; extensive in situ coal beds; mixed tidal and fluvial
delta front with tide and fluvial flood-dominated sandy
mouthbars.
Reservoir types and geometry: Distributary channel-fills: 5-20 metres thick medium to coarse
grained clean to mud-laminated cross-bedded and laterally
accreted sand, forming low sinuosity belts up to 2-3 km wide,
(W/T = 50-100).
Channel mouthbars: 2-6 metres thick; fine to medium grained
sand with both muddy tidal and alluvial flood-dominated facies.
Width up to 10 km, widespread triangular to irregular elliptical
geometry. (W/T > 1000).

22 1
 Controls on Delta Sedimentation in East Kalimantan from the Miocene to the present day.

Although these three broad time groupings of the Mahakam delta (the present, the Mid-Upper Miocene
and the Lower Miocene) are exposed in different ways, and thus not directly comparable, there are
indications that the Lower Miocene Deltas were prone to significant and high energy alluvial flood
influence whereas alluvial floods do not occur in the present day delta. The Middle Miocene delta
system is interpreted to be somewhat in between the Lower Miocene and the modern in terms of the
alluvial regime and the role of fluvial floods. Thus, in the Mid Miocene cores, flood deposits seem to
occur, as indicated by subsurface maps showing crevasse splays, but cores showing clear tidal features
such as tidal doublets are also present.

We have no reason to believe that the tidal activity has varied between the Lower Miocene and present
day, as the Strait of Makassar was also narrow during the Miocene and as persistent tropical conditions
have affected the region during the entire Tertiary. This suggests likely high rainfall and fluvial
discharge from the Lower Miocene to present, and we must look for an alternative interpretation as to
why the Lower Miocene and Modern Mahakam deltas differ. It is our interpretation that the Kutei
Lakes region immediately west of the Samarinda Anticlinorium has played an important role in
controlling the nature of the fluvial discharge affecting the Mahakam Deltas.

The Kutei Lakes Region is a large subsiding swamp area with several shallow lakes. None of the major
tributaries of the Mahakam or the Mahakam River itself actively flow into the lakes, however, all
major rivers in the Kutei Lakes Region have levee banks and regularly overflow during times of flood
into the adjacent lakes and swamps. The Kutei Lakes region receives little sediment from the main
rivers as the flood waters carry only the fine material at the top of the flood flow. Thick peat beds
accumulate in the region instead of a large lacustrine delta and the bulk of the sediment continues to be
carried by the Mahakam River towards the present day delta. Although sediment is not extensively
deposited within the Kutei Lakes Area, water is. The effect of floods is buffered by the ability of the
lakes to accommodate a large volume of water as the flow backs-up due to the constricted and incised
nature of the existing Mahakam channel through the Samarinda Anticlinorium. During periods of low
rainfall the Mahakam River is gradually fed by the accumulated water in the Kutei Lakes Region and
so a large reduction in flow is also not commonly achieved.

As the lakes gradually developed in the subsiding alluvial basin, the amplitude, energy and effects of
alluvial floods on the delta sedimentology gradually waned. This decreased fluvial transport energy
resulted in a proportionally greater effect of tides, since the tidal sedimentary facies could not be
obliterated and replaced by the higher energy flood events. This resulted in a gradually decreasing
depositional energy during the Neogene and a disappearance of alluvial flood deposits within the delta.

The timing of the formation of the Kutei Lakes Region should document the change in the nature of
the Mahakam delta from fluvial flood dominated to a non-flooding, lower energy mixed fluvial and
tide dominated delta. Unfortunately no work has been carried out to date the beginning of subsidence
in this section of the Mahakam Alluvial Basin and the onset of lacustrine development in the Kutei
Lakes Region. The present interpretation that these Lakes are Pliocene to Pleistocene in age is based on
inference and not on hard data. The Kahala No.l well drilled by Mobil intersected approximately 400
m of lacustrine deposits prior to penetrating Lower Miocene to Oligocene shales. As the section is
lacustrine, conventional palaeontological dating cannot be used. A palynological study may determine

222
the age of these lake beds and thus the timing of the change in Mahakam deltas from flood/fluvial
dominated to mixed fluvial-tidal dominated.

In conclusion, the Modern Mahakam delta furnishes a good analog for the Middle Miocene to recent
deltaic deposits within the Kutei Basin, in terms of reservoir geometry and to a certain extent, also
sedimentary processes and facies. The geometry, scale and internal architecture of distributary
channels and mouth bars appear similar in the modern and Middle Miocene. However, the Middle
Miocene sands - particularly the mouth bar deposits - exhibit more pronounced effects of alluvial
floods. In terms of a more generally applicable model for other basins, the Modern Mahakam Delta is
specific in that it is a tropical delta in a low wave, mesotidal environment with a non-flooding fluvial
discharge. It is interesting to note that this last, very important effect appears to be the result of a
tectonic control on fluvial processes, i.e. the suppression of floods by the subsiding Kutei Lakes
Region inland of the Samarinda Anticlinorium. Another very important tectonic effect on deltaic
sedimentation patterns is the incision of the Mahakam River, which has maintained the delta in the
same position on the coast since the Middle Miocene. These types of tectonic control on deltaic
sedimentation and stratigraphy have not been described in other deltaic basins and would constitute
excellent subjects for fLiture research.

223