1887
Volume 64, Issue 2
  • E-ISSN: 1365-2478

Abstract

ABSTRACT

A calendar time interpolation method for 2D seismic amplitude maps, done in two steps, is presented. The contour interpolation part is formulated as a quadratic programming problem, whereas the amplitude value interpolation is based on a conditional probability formulation. The method is applied on field data from the Sleipner CO storage project. The output is a continuous image (movie) of the CO plume. Besides visualization, the output can be used to better couple 4D seismic to other types of data acquired. The interpolation uncertainty increases with the time gap between consecutive seismic surveys and is estimated by leaving a survey out (blind test). Errors from such tests can be used to identify problems in understanding the flow and possibly improve the interpolation scheme for a given case. Field‐life cost of various acquisition systems and repeat frequencies are linked to the time‐lapse interpolation errors. The error in interpolated amplitudes increased by 3%‐4% per year of interpolation gap for the Sleipner case. Interpolation can never fully replace measurements.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12291
2015-07-27
2024-03-28
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. BoaitF.C., WhiteN.J., BickleM.J., ChadwickR.A., NeufeldJ.A. and HuppertH.E.2012. Spatial and temporal evolution of injected Co2 at the Sleipner Field, North Sea. Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth117(B3). ISSN 2156–2202,
    [Google Scholar]
  2. ChadwickR.A. and NoyD.J.2010. History‐matching flow simulations and time‐lapse seismic data from the Sleipner CO2 plume. Geological Society, London, Petroleum Geology Conference series 7, 1171–1182.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. ChadwickR.A., ZweigelP., GregersenU., KirbyG.A., HollowayS. and JohannessenP.N.2004. Geological reservoir characterization of a CO2 storage site: the Utsira Sand, Sleipner, northern North Sea. Energy29(910), 1371–1381. 6th International Conference on Greenhouse Gas Control Technologies. ISSN 0360‐5442.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. FurreA.‐K. and EikenO.2014. Dual sensor streamer technology used in Sleipner CO2 injection monitoring. Geophysical Prospecting62(5), 1075–1088. ISSN 1365‐2478.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. HaleD.2009. A method for estimating apparent displacement vectors from time‐lapse seismic images. Geophysics74(5), V99–V107.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. KrauseE.F.1987. Taxicab Geometry: An Adventure in Non‐Euclidean Geometry. Dover. ISBN 0486252027.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. LandrøM., SolheimO.A., HildeE., EkrenB.O. and StrønenL.K.1999. The Gullfaks 4D seismic study. Petroleum Geoscience5(3), 213–226.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. LumleyD.E.2004. Business and technology challenges for 4D seismic reservoir monitoring. The Leading Edge23(11), 1166–1168.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. MikkelsenP.L., GuderianK. and du PlessisG.2008. Improved reservoir management through integration of 4D‐seismic interpretation, Draugen Field, Norway. SPE‐96400‐PA.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. SinghV., CavanaghA., HansenH., NazarianB., IdingM. and RingroseP.2010. Reservoir modeling of Co2 plume behavior calibrated against monitoring data from Sleipner, Norway. SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, Florence, Italy. September 2010.
  11. TikhonovA.N., GoncharskyA., StepanovV.V. and YagolaA.G.1995. Numerical Methods for the Solution of Ill‐Posed Problems. Springer. ISBN 079233583X.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Van GestelJ.‐P., KommedalJ.H., BarkvedO.I., MundalI., BakkeR. and BestK.D.2008. Continuous seismic surveillance of Valhall Field. The Leading Edge27(12), 1616–1621.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. VerdonJ.P., KendallJ.‐M., StorkA.L., ChadwickR.A., WhiteD.J. and BissellR.C.2013. Comparison of geomechanical deformation induced by megatonne‐scale CO2 storage at Sleipner, Weyburn, and In Salah. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences110(30), E2762–E2771.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12291
Loading
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12291
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article

Most Cited This Month Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error