Volume 67 Number 6
  • E-ISSN: 1365-2478



Faced with the challenge of rapidly screening a huge expanse of frontier exploration acreage, often characterized by sparse vintage data, it is our experience that a combination of appropriate air‐ and ground‐based geophysical techniques contributes positively to the exploration value chain. Airborne gravity gradiometry in conjunction with conventional gravity and magnetic data, as well as geological knowledge, add significant value to the screening process. This combination can subsequently assist in optimizing the location of the more time‐consuming and expensive seismic programme. In addition, analysis and inversion of passive seismic data have also proven useful in providing depth to basement estimates, and results derived from all the techniques investigated have been consistent within several study areas. Following initial tests, where the data were independently analysed and cross‐checked for consistency (including comparisons with active source seismic data and well data, when available), the company now routinely adopts the integration of these techniques in our frontier exploration acreage to support sedimentary basin delineation and mapping. This allows the optimal positioning and focussing of the higher spend and higher footprint programmes, such as active reflection seismic.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...


  1. BellR.E., AndersonR. and PratsonL.1997. Gravity gradiometry resurfaces. The Leading Edge16, 55–59.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. CooperG.R.J. and CowanD.R.2006. Enhancing potential field data using filters based on the local phase. Computational Geosciences32, 1585–1591.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. DohertyJ.T., BennettS., MartiniF., MeladyG., RogersE. and SimpsonK.2013a. Integrated geophysical exploration in the frontier East Africa Rift system. SEG convention, Houston, TX, USA, Workshop 9, Expanded Abstracts.
  4. DohertyJ.T., BennettS., MartiniF., MeladyG., SimpsonK., and RogersE.2013b. Integrated geophysical exploration in a frontier Basin‐South Omo, Ethiopia. 75th EAGE Conference & Exhibition incorporating SPE EUROPEC 2013, London, UK, Expanded Abstract.
  5. FediM. and FlorioG.2001. Detection of potential fields source boundaries by enhanced horizontal derivative method. Geophysical Prospecting49, 40–58.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. FitzGeraldD., ReidA., HolsteinH. and BiegertE.2007. The amplitude/phase treatment of full‐tensor gradiometry. SEG Technical Program, Expanded Abstracts.
  7. Jorgensen, G.2013. The Lake Albert Rift system: imaging at the prospect scale using full tensor gravity and parameter space inversion. SEG convention, Houston, TX, USA, Workshop, Expanded Abstracts.
  8. JorgensenG. and KisabethL.2000. Joint 3‐D inversion of gravity, magnetic and tensor gravity fields for imaging salt formations in the deepwater Gulf of Mexico. SEG Technical Program, Expanded Abstracts.
  9. KuC.C. and SharpJ.A.1983. Werner deconvolution for automated magnetic interpretation and its refinement using Marquardt's inverse modelling. Geophysics6, 754–774.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. LiX.2003. On the use of different methods for estimating magnetic depth. The Leading Edge22, 1090–1099.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. MacLeodI., JonesK. and DaiT.F.1993. 3D analytic signal in the interpretation of total magnetic field data at low magnetic latitudes. Exploration Geophysics24, 679–688.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. MartiniF., DaviR., DohertyJ.T. and MonganJ.2015. Ambient noise to estimate depth to basement: case studies from East Africa basins. First Break33, 57–63.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. MartiniF., LokmerI., JonsdottirK., De BarrosL., MöllhoffM., BeanC.J., et al. 2013. A passive low‐frequency seismic experiment in the Albertine Graben, Uganda. Geophysical Prospecting61, 39–61.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. O'BrienJ., RodriguezA., SixtaD., DaviesM.A. and HoughtonP.2005. Resolving the K‐2 salt structure in the Gulf of Mexico: an integrated approach using prestack depth imaging and full tensor gravity gradiometry. The Leading Edge24, 404–409.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. PriceA.D., CacheuxA., ChowdhuryP.R., ShieldsG., WeberJ. and Yalamanchili Rao, S.V.2013. Airborne gravity gradient acquisition for oil exploration in Uganda. 75th EAGE Conference & Exhibition incorporating SPE EUROPEC 2013, London UK, Expanded Abstracts, 5514–5518.
  16. ReidA.B., AllsopJ.M., GranserH., MillettA.J. and SomertonI.W.1990. Magnetic interpretation in three dimensions using Euler deconvolution. Geophysics55, 80–91.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. SalemA., WilliamsS., FairheadD., SmithR. and RavatD.2008. Interpretation of magnetic data using tilt‐angle derivatives. Geophysics73, L1–L10.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. VerduzcoB., FairheadJ.D., GreenC.M. and MacKenzieC.2004. New insights into magnetic derivatives for structural mapping. The Leading Edge23, 116–119.
    [Google Scholar]

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): Airborne geophysics , Frontier exploration , Gravity , Integrated geophysics , Magnetic and Passive seismic
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