1887
Volume 73, Issue 4
  • E-ISSN: 1365-2478

Abstract

Abstract

One of the research gaps is to understand the development of seismic characteristics of gas‐saturated rock along with the change in rock properties because of chemical reactions. We suggest a method to explain the change in elastic properties brought on by CO injection in a rock by capturing the physico‐chemical interactions observed in the laboratory in a theory of rock physics. To explain the laboratory‐measured physical characteristics and velocity of a dynamic rock–fluid system, we include a time‐dependent component in the existing cemented‐sand model. We demonstrate theoretically the rate of change of elastic moduli of the dry frame by incorporating the measured rate of change of cement due to chemical dissolution. We adapt the theory such that it can be applied to the field data and calibrate the theory using water‐saturated well log data from the Ankleshwar field, an established oil field in the Cambay basin, western India. Theoretical time‐lapse logs of velocity and density are then produced using the theory over a range of CO saturations, assuming cementing material in grain contacts and geochemical interactions comparable to those observed in the laboratory rock. Then, using theoretical logs, corresponding time‐lapse synthetic seismic data are produced for different saturation. These data clearly demonstrate that, for a uniform model, velocity decreases by up to 18% as CO saturation increases from 0% to 20% (ignoring the chemical effect), and that, for a specific saturation, say 20%, chemical effects result in a 17% decrease in velocity from the present to the end of 60 years. However, for the patchy model, velocity decreases maximum by 14% and 16% due to varying saturation and chemical reaction. Moreover, for a particular saturation of CO, say 20%, velocity differs by 16% for different types of models. This research contributes to making strategy for CO‐sequestration in a designated field.

© 2025 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers. © 2024 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers.
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.13642
2025-04-17
2026-02-07

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.13642
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Al Hosni, M., Caspari, E., Pevzner, R., Daley, T.M. & Gurevich, B. (2016) Using time‐lapse vertical seismic profiling data to constrain velocitysaturation relations: the Frio brine pilot CO2 injection. Geophysical Prospecting, Advances in Rock Physics, 64(4), 987–1000. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2478.12386
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Avseth, P., Mukerji, T., Mavko, G. & Dvorkin, J. (2010) Rock‐physics diagnostics of depositional texture, diagenetic alterations, and reservoir heterogeneity in high‐porosity siliciclastic sediments and rocks — A review of selected models and suggested work flows. Geophysics, 75, 75A31–75A47. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1190/1.3483770
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Bachu, S. (2000) Sequestration of CO2 in geological media: criteria and approach for site selection in response to climate change. Energy Conversion and Management, 41, 953–970. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/s0196‐8904(99)00149‐1
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Bickle, M.J. (2009) Geological carbon storage. Nature Geosciences, 2, 815–818. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1038/ngeo687
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Biot, M.A. (1956) Theory of propagation of elastic waves in a fluid‐saturated porous solid—I. Low‐frequency range. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 28, 168–178. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1121/1.1908239
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Biot, M.A. (1962) Mechanics of deformation and acoustic propagation in porous media. Journal of Applied Physics, 33, 1482–1498. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1728759
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Chapman, M., Maultzsch, S., Liu, E. & Li, X.‐Y. (2003) The effect of fluid saturation in an anisotropic multi‐scale equant porosity model. Journal of Applied Geophysics, 54, 191–202. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jappgeo.2003.01.003
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Creasy, N., Huang, L., Gasperikova, E., Harbert, W., Bratton, T. & Zhou, Q. (2024) CO2 rock physics modeling for reliable monitoring of geologic carbon storage. Commun Earth Environ, 5, 333. https://doi.org/10.1038/s43247-024-01493-6
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Dimri, V.P. (2014) Challenges in earth science in the next decade. Proceedings of the Indian National Science Academy, 80, 21. Available from: https://doi.org/10.16943/ptinsa/2014/v80i1/55083
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Dvorkin, J. & Nur, A. (1993) Dynamic poroelasticity: a unified model with the squirt and the Biot mechanisms. Geophysics, 58, 524–533. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1443435
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Dvorkin, J., Mavko, G., & Nur, A. (1995) Squirt flow in fully saturated rocks. Geophysics, 60, 97–107. https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1443767
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Dvorkin, J. & Nur, A. (1996) Elasticity of high‐porosity sandstones: theory for two North Sea data sets. Geophysics, 61, 1363–1370. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1444059
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Durney, D.W. (1972) Solution‐transfer, an important geological deformation mechanism. Nature, 235, 315–317. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1038/235315a0
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Ganguli, S.S., Vedanti, N. & Dimri, V.P. (2016) 4D reservoir characterization using well log data for feasible CO2‐enhanced oil recovery at Ankleshwar, Cambay Basin—A rock physics diagnostic and modeling approach. Journal of Applied Geophysics, 135, 111–121. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jappgeo.2016.10.007
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Ganguli, S.S., Vedanti, N., Akervoll, I. & Dimri, V.P. (2016) Assessing the feasibility of CO2‐enhanced oil recovery and storage in mature oil field: a case study from Cambay basin. Journal of the Geological Society of India, 88, 273–280. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12594‐016‐0490‐x
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Ganguli, S.S., Sen, S. & Verma, S., (2021), Characterization of organic content, brittleness index, and geomechanical properties of the Eocene Cambay Shales — Insights from the Ankleshwar oil field in western India. Interpretation, 9, T235–T252. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1190/INT‐2020‐0133.1
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Gassmann, F. (1951) Elastic waves through a packing of spheres. Geophysics, 16, 673–685. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1437718
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Ghosh, R. & Sen, M.K. (2012) Predicting subsurface CO2 movement: from laboratory to field scale. Geophysics, 77, M27–M37. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2011‐0224.1
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Ghosh, R., Ojha, M., Sain, K. & Thakur, N.K. (2006) Physical parameters of hydrated sediments estimated from marine seismic reflection data: a case study. Current Science, 90, 1421–1430.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Ghosh, R., Sain, K. & Ojha, M. (2010) Effective medium modeling of gas hydrate‐filled fractures using sonic log in the Krishna‐Godavari basin, offshore eastern India. Journal of Geophysical Research, 115, B06101.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Harbert, W., Goodman, A., Spaulding, R., Haljasmaa, I., Crandall, D., Sanguinito, S., Kutchko, B., Tkach, M., Fuchs, S., Werth, C.J., Tsotsis, T., Dalton, L., Jessen, K., Shi, Z. & Frailey, S., (2020) CO2 induced changes in Mount Simon sandstone: Understanding links to post CO2 injection monitoring, seismicity, and reservoir integrity. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 100, 103109.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Hawkins, D.G. (2004) No exit: thinking about leakage from geologic carbon storage sites. Energy, 29, 1571–1578. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2004.03.059
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Hovorka, S. (2009) Frio brine pilot: The first U. S. sequestration test. Southwest Hydrology, 8, 26–31.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Ivandic, M., Juhlin, C., Lüth, S., Bergmann, P., Kashubin, A., Sopher, D., Ivanova, A., Baumann, G. & Henninges, J. (2015) Geophysical monitoring at the Ketzin pilot site for CO2 storage: New insights into the plume evolution. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 32, 90–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2014.10.015
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Jakobsen, F., Lindgreen, H. & Springer, N. (2000) Precipitation and flocculation of spherical nano‐silica in North Sea chalk. Clay Minerals, 35, 175–184. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1180/000985500546567
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Jessen, K., Kovscek, A.R. & Orr, F.M. (2005) Increasing CO2 storage in oil recovery. Energy Conversion and Management, 46, 293–311. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2004.02.019
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Joy, C., Vanorio, T. & Sen, M.K. (2011) Differentiating chemical effects and pressure effects on the elastic properties of the lower Tuscaloosa sandstone in Cranfield, Mississippi by injecting carbon dioxide rich brine (pp. 2119–2123). SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstract. Houston, TX: SEG Library. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1190/1.3627628
  28. Karamalidis, A., Hakala, J.A., Griffith, C., Hedges, S. & Lu, J. (2010) Laboratory investigation of CO2‐rock‐brine interactions using natural sandstones and brine samples from the SECARB Tuscaloosa injection zone. In Proceedings of the GSA Denver Annual Meeting.
  29. Kharaka, Y.K., Cole, D.R., Hovorka, S.D., Gunter, W.D., Knauss, K.G. & Freifeld, B.M. (2006) Gas‐water‐rock interactions in Frio Formation following CO2 injection: implications for the storage of greenhouse gases in sedimentary basins. Geology, 34, 577. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1130/g22357.1
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Lumley, D.E. (1995) Seismic monitoring of hydrocarbon fluid flow. Journal of Mathematical Imaging and Vision, 5, 287–296. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1007/bf01250285
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Lumley, D.E. (2010) 4D seismic monitoring of CO2 sequestration. The Leading Edge, 29, 150–155. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1190/1.3304817
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Lumley, D.E. (2001) Time‐lapse seismic reservoir monitoring. Geophysics, 66, 50–53. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1444921
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Lu, J., Kharaka, Y.K., Thordsen, J.J., Horita, J., Karamalidis, A., Griffith, C. et al. (2012) CO2–rock–brine interactions in lower Tuscaloosa Formation at Cranfield CO2 sequestration site, Mississippi, U.S.A. Chemical Geology, 291, 269–277. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemgeo.2011.10.020
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Mavko, G. & Jizba, D. (1991) Estimating grain‐scale fluid effects on velocity dispersion in rocks. Geophysics, 56, 1940–1949. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1443005
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Mavko, G., Mukerji, T. & Dvorkin, J. (2009) The rock physics handbook. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511626753
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Mukerji, T. & Mavko, G. (1994) Pore fluid effects on seismic velocity in anisotropic rocks. Geophysics, 59, 233–244. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1443585
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Nobes, D.C. (1986) The inclusion of anisotropy in Maxwell's equations. Geophysical Journal International, 85, 655–662. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365‐246x.1986.tb04539.x
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Nobes, D.C., Villinger, H., Davis, E.E. & Law, L. K. (1986) Estimation of marine sediment bulk physical properties at depth from seafloor geophysical measurements. Journal of Geophysical Research, 91, 14033–14043.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. Rochelle, C.A., Czernichowski‐Lauriol, I. & Milodowski, A.E. (2004) The impact of chemical reactions on CO2 storage in geological formations: a brief review. Geological Society, London, 233, 87–106. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1144/gsl.sp.2004.233.01.07
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Sengupta, M., Ghosh, R., Sen, A. & Maiti, S. (2023) Capillary pressure equilibrium theory mapping of 4D seismic inversion results to predict saturation in a gas‐water system. Geophysics, 88, M49–M58. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2022‐0054.1
     [Google Scholar]
  41. Sun, Y., Wei, L., Dai, C., Yu, Z., & Xin, Y. (2021) The carbonic acid‐rock reaction in feldspar/dolomite‐rich tightsand and its impact on CO2‐water relative permeability during geological carbon storage. Chemical Geology, 584, 120527.
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Thordsen, J.J., Kharaka, Y.K., Thomas, R.B., Ambats, G., Abedini, A., Manning, M.A. & Lu, J. (2012) Evolving geochemistry of Tuscaloosa formation brine in response to continuing CO2 injection at Cranfield EOR site, Mississippi, USA. Abs 361, 11th Annual Conference of CCUS.
  43. Vafaie, A., Cama, J., Soler, J.M., Kivi, I.R., & Vilarrasa, V. (2023) Chemo‐hydro‐mechanical effects of CO2 injection on reservoir and seal rocks: A review on laboratory experiments. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 178, 113270.
     [Google Scholar]
  44. Vanorio, T. & Mavko, G. (2011) Laboratory measurements of the acoustic and transport properties of carbonate rocks and their link with the amount of microcrystalline matrix. Geophysics, 76, E105–E115, https://doi.org/10.1190/1.3580632
     [Google Scholar]
  45. Vanorio, T. (2015) Recent advances in time‐lapse, laboratory rock physics for the characterization and monitoring of fluid‐rock interactions. Geophysics, 80, WA49–WA59. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2014‐0202.1
     [Google Scholar]
  46. Vanorio, T., Scotellaro, C. & Mavko, G. (2007) To fluid‐substitute or not to fluid‐substitute: The effect of pore shape and chemical processes on Gassmann's predictability in carbonate rocks, 77th Annual International Meeting, SEG, Expanded Abstracts, 1584–1588. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1190/1.2792798
  47. Vialle, S. & Vanorio, T. (2011) Laboratory measurements of elastic properties of carbonate rocks during injection of reactive CO2‐saturated water. Geophysical Research Letter, 38, L01302. Available from: https://doi.org/10.1029/2010gl045606
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.13642
Loading
A rock physics modelling approach for time‐lapse monitoring and characterization of fluid–rock interactions in hydrocarbon reservoirs
Geophysical Prospecting 73, 994 (2025); https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2478.13642
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.13642
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.13642
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): modelling; permeability; porosity; seismic; velocity

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