Porosity estimates on basaltic basement samples using the neutron absorption cross section (Σ): Implications for fluid flow and alteration of the oceanic crust

Little information presently exists on the heterogeneity of hydrothermal alteration in the oceanic crust or the variability of the associated thermal, fluid, and chemical fluxes. Formation porosities are important controls on these fluxes and porosity measurements are routinely collected during wireline logging operations. These estimates on the formation porosity are measures of the moderating power of the formation in response to bombardment by neutrons. The neutron absorption macroscopic cross-section (Σ = σρ) is a representation of the ability of the rock to slow down neutrons, and as such can be used to invert the porosity of a sample. Boron, lithium and other trace elements are important controls on σ-values, and the distribution of these is influenced by secondary low-temperature alteration processes. Consequently, computed σ-values may be used to discriminate between various basalt types and to identify areas of secondary alteration. Critical in this analysis is the degree of alteration, since elements such as B and Li can dramatically affect the sigma value and leading to erroneous porosity values. We analysed over 150 'pool-samples' for S, Li, Be and B element concentrations to estimate their contribution to the measured neutron porosity. These chemical analyses allow the calculation of the model sigma values for individual samples. Using a range of variably altered samples recovered during IODP Expeditions 309 and 312 we provide bulk estimates of alteration within the drilled section using the measured neutron porosity. B concentration in Hole 1256D increases with depth, with sharp rises at 959 and 1139 mbsf. Elevated wireline neutron porosities cannot always be directly linked with high B content. However, our preliminary results imply that increased neutron porosity (~15) at depths below 1100 mbsf may reflect hydrothermal alteration rather than formation porosity. This interpretation is supported when compared with generally lower computed porosity estimates derived from resistivity measurements for the same intervals.