1887
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Geophysical Prospecting
  4. Volume 62, Issue 3
  5. Article
Volume 62, Issue 3
  • E-ISSN: 1365-2478

Abstract

ABSTRACT

A towed streamer electromagnetic system capable of simultaneous seismic and electromagnetic data acquisition has recently been developed and tested in the North Sea. We introduce a 3D inversion methodology for towed streamer electromagnetic data that includes a moving sensitivity domain. Our implementation is based on the 3D integral equation method for computing responses and Fréchet derivatives and uses the re‐weighted regularized conjugate gradient method for minimizing the objective functional with focusing regularization. We present two model studies relevant to hydrocarbon exploration in the North Sea. First, we demonstrate the ability of a towed electromagnetic system to detect and characterize the Harding field, a medium‐sized North Sea hydrocarbon target. We compare our 3D inversion of towed streamer electromagnetic data with 3D inversion of conventional marine controlled‐source electromagnetic data and observe few differences between the recovered models. Second, we demonstrate the ability of a towed streamer electromagnetic system to detect and characterize the Peon discovery, which is representative of an infrastructure‐led shallow gas play in the North Sea. We also present an actual case study for the 3D inversion of towed streamer electromagnetic data from the Troll field in the North Sea and demonstrate our ability to image all the Troll West Oil and Gas Provinces and the Troll East Gas Province. We conclude that 3D inversion of data from the current generation of towed streamer electromagnetic systems can adequately recover hydrocarbon‐bearing formations to depths of approximately 2 km. We note that by obviating the need for ocean‐bottom receivers, the towed streamer electromagnetic system enables electromagnetic data to be acquired over very large areas in frontier and mature basins for higher acquisition rates and relatively lower cost than conventional marine controlled‐source electromagnetic methods.

Copyright © 2014 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers © 2014 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12097
2014-01-10
2024-04-29

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12097
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. AmundsenH.E.F., JohansenS. and RostenT.2004. A sea bed logging (SBL) calibration survey over the Troll gas field. Presented at 66th EAGE Conference and Exhibition , Paris.
  2. AndersonC. and MattssonJ.2010. An integrated approach to marine electromagnetic surveying using a towed streamer and source. First Break, 28(5), 71‐75.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. AvdeevD.B., KuvshinovA.V., PankratovO.V. and NewmanG.A.1997. High‐performance three‐dimensional electromagnetic modeling using modified Neumann Series: Wide‐band numerical solution and examples. Journal of Geomagnetism and Geoelectricity49, 1519‐1539.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. BeamishD.2003. Airborne EM footprints. Geophysical Prospecting51, 49‐60.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. CommerM. and NewmanG.A.2008. New advances in controlled source electromagnetic inversion. Geophysical Journal International172, 513‐535.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. ConstableS.2010. Ten years of marine CSEM for hydrocarbon exploration. Geophysics, 75, 75A67‐75A81.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. CoxL.H., WilsonG.A. and ZhdanovM.S.2010. 3D inversion of airborne electromagnetic data using a moving footprint. Exploration Geophysics41, 250–259.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. CoxL.H., WilsonG.A. and ZhdanovM.S.2012. 3D inversion of airborne electromagnetic data. Geophysics77, WB59‐WB69.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. CoxL.H. and ZhdanovM.S.2007. Large scale 3D inversion of HEM data using a moving footprint. 77thAnnual International Meeting, SEG, Expanded Abstracts, 467‐47.
  10. ČumaM., WilsonG.A. and ZhdanovM.S.2012. Large‐scale 3D inversion of potential field data. Geophysical Prospecting.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. EndoM., ČumaM. and ZhdanovM.S.2009. Large‐scale electromagnetic modeling for multiple inhomogeneous domains. Communications in Computational Physics6, 269‐289.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. ErichsenL.2009. The Peon Field ‐ Unlocking unconventional reserves in the North Sea. Presented at SPE Bergen, Bergen.
  13. GabrielsenP.T., BrevikI., MittetR. and LøsethL.O.2009. Investigating the exploration potential for 3D CSEM using a calibration survey over the Troll field. First Break, 27 (6), 67‐75.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. GribenkoA. and ZhdanovM.S.2007. Rigorous 3D inversion of marine CSEM data based on the integral equation method. Geophysics72, WA73‐WA84.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. HesthammerJ., StefatosA., BoulaenkoM., FanavollS. and DanielsenJ.2010. CSEM performance in light of well results. The Leading Edge29, 34‐41.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. HohmannG.W.1975. Three‐dimensional induced polarization and electromagnetic modeling. Geophysics, 40, 309‐324.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. HursánG. and ZhdanovM.S.2002. Contraction integral equation method in three‐dimensional electromagnetic modeling. Radio Science37(6), 1089.
     [Google Scholar]
  18. LinfootJ.P., ClarkeC., MattssonJ. and PriceD.2011. Modeling and analysis of towed EM data – An example from a North Sea field trial. Pre‐ sented at the 73rd EAGE Conference and Exhibition, Vienna.
  19. LiuG. and BeckerA.1990. Two‐dimensional mapping of sea‐ice keels with airborne electromagnetics. Geophysics55, 239‐248.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. MackieR., WattsM.D. and RodiW.2007. Joint 3D inversion of CSEM and MT data. 77thAnnual Meeting, SEG, Expanded Abstracts.
  21. MattssonJ.A., BjornemoE., McKayA. and RonaessM.2012. Towed EM system data ‐ error analysis. Presented at 74thEAGE Conference and Exhibition, Copenhagen.
  22. MattssonJ.A., LundL.L., LimaJ.L., EnglemarkF.E. and McKayA.M.2010. Case study ‐ A towed EM test at the Peon discovery in the North Sea. Presented at 72ndEAGE Conference and Exhibition, Barcelona.
  23. McGillivrayP.R., OldenburgD.W., EllisR.G. and HabashyT.1994. Calculation of sensitivities for the frequency‐domain electromagnetic problem. Geophysical Journal International114, 1‐4.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. McKayA., ClarkeC., LinfootJ. and MattssonJ.2011. Interpretative quality control of towed EM data ‐ Examples from the North Sea. Presented at 73rd EAGE Conference and Exhibition, Vienna.
  25. PortniaguineO. and ZhdanovM.S.1999. Focusing geophysical inversion images. Geophysics64, 874‐887.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. RaicheA.P.1974. An integral equation approach to three‐dimensional modelling. Geophysical Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society36, 363‐376.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. ReidJ.E., PfafflingA. and VrbancichJ.2006. Airborne electromagnetic footprints in 1D earths. Geophysics71, G63‐G72.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. da SilvaN.V., MorganJ.V., MacGregorL. and WarnerM.2012. A finite element multifrontal method for 3D CSEM modeling in the frequency domain. Geophysics77, E101–E115.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. SingerB.S. and FainbergE.B.1995. Generalization of the iterative dispersive method for modeling electromagnetic fields in nonuniform media with displacement currents. Journal of Applied Geophysics34 , 41‐46.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. StørenT., ZachJ.J. and MaaøF.A.2008. Gradient calculations for 3D inversion of CSEM data using a fast finite‐difference time‐domain modeling code. Presented at 70thEAGE Conference and Exhibition, Rome.
  31. TikhonovA.N. and ArseninY.V.1977. Solution of Ill‐posed Problems . Winston, New York.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. WeideltP.1975. EM induction in three‐dimensional structures. Journal of Geophysics, 49, 60‐74.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. WeissC.J. and ConstableS.C.2006. Mapping thin resistors and hydro‐ carbons with marine EM methods. Part II – Modeling and analysis in 3D. Geophysics71, G321–332.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. WeitemeyerK. and ConstableS.2010. Mapping shallow geology and gas hydrate with marine CSEM surveys. First Break28, 97–102.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. ZiolkowskiA., ParrR., WrightD., NocklesV., LimondC., MorrisE. and LinfootJ.2010. Multi‐transient electromagnetic repeatability experiment over the North Sea Harding field. Geophysical Prospecting58 , 1159‐1176.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. XiongZ.1992. Electromagnetic modeling of 3D structures by the method of system iteration using integral equations. Geophysics, 57, 1556‐1561.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. ZhdanovM.S.2002. Geophysical Inverse Theory and Regularization Problems. Elsevier, Amsterdam.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. ZhdanovM.S.2009. Geophysical Electromagnetic Theory and Methods. Elsevier, Amsterdam.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. ZhdanovM.S., GribenkoA. and ČumaM.2008. Regularized focusing inversion of marine CSEM data using minimum vertical support stabilizer. 78th Annual Meeting, SEG, Expanded Abstracts.
  40. ZhdanovM.S., ČumaM., WilsonG.A., VelikhovE.P., BlackN. and GribenkoA.2011. Iterative electromagnetic migration for 3D inversion of marine CSEM data. Geophysical Prospecting59, 1101‐1113.
     [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12097
Loading
Three‐dimensional inversion of towed streamer electromagnetic data
Geophysical Prospecting 62, 552 (2014); https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2478.12097
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12097
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.12097
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): Electromagnetic; Modelling; Sensitivity domain

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