1887
Volume 54, Issue 3
  • E-ISSN: 1365-2478

Abstract

ABSTRACT

Two formulae are developed for estimating horizontal permeability directly from maps of 4D seismic signatures. The choice of the formula used depends on whether the seismic is dominated by changes of pressure or saturation. However, pressure derived from time‐lapse seismic, or seismic amplitudes controlled predominantly by pressure are to be preferred for optimal ‘illumination’ of the reservoir. The permeability is predicted to be dependent on porosity but weighted by a 4D term related to the magnitude and spatial gradient of the 4D signature. Tests performed on model‐based synthetic seismic data affirm the validity and accuracy of this approach. Application to field data from the UK continental shelf reveals a large‐scale permeability variation similar to the existing simulation model, but with additional fine‐scale detail. The technique thus has the potential of providing extra information with which to update the simulation model. The resultant permeability estimates have been successfully ground‐truthed against the results of two well tests. As non‐repeatable noise in the time‐lapse seismic data diminishes with improved 4D‐related acquisition, it will become increasingly possible to make robust permeability estimates using this approach.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1111/j.1365-2478.2006.00535.x
2006-04-12
2020-05-27
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Al‐MaskeriY. and MacBethC.2005. Quantifying transmissible barriers using 4D. Seismic. 75th SEG Meeting, Houston , USA , Expanded Abstracts, 2472–2476.
  2. AzizK. and SettariA.1990. Petroleum Reservoir Simulation . Elsevier. Science Publishing Co.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. BarkvedO., BaerheimA.G., HoweD.J., KommedalJ.H. and NicolG.2003. Life of field seismic implementation –‘First at Valhall’. 65th EAGE Conference, Stavanger , Norway , Extended Abstracts, A22.
  4. BrooksR.H. and CoreyA.T.1964. Hydraulic Properties of Porous Media . Hydrology Paper 3, Colorado. State University , Fort Collins .
    [Google Scholar]
  5. CoatsK.H., DempseyJ.R. and HendersonJ.H.1970. The use of vertical equilibrium in two‐dimensional simulation of three‐dimensional reservoir performance. Proceedings of the Second Symposium on Numerical Simulation of Reservoir . Performance, Dallas., Transactions, Vol. 251.
  6. DakeL.1994. The Practice of Reservoir Engineering . Developments in Petroleum. Science 36. Elsevier. Science Publishing Co.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. GotoR., LowdenD., PaulsenJ.O., OsdalB. and AronsenH.2004. Norne steered streamer 4D case study. 66th EAGE Conference, Paris , France , Extended Abstracts, H021.
  8. GraderA.S. and HorneR.N.1998. Interference testing: detecting a circular impermeable or compressible subregion. SPE Formation Evaluation, SPE 15585.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. KennettB.L.N.1983. Seismic Wave Propagation in Stratified Media . Cambridge . Monographs on Mechanics and Applied Mathematics, Cambridge University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. LandrøM.2001. Discrimination between pressure and fluid saturation changes from time‐lapse seismic data. Geophysics66, 836–844.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. LandrøM.2002. Uncertainties in quantitative time‐lapse seismic analysis. Geophysical Prospecting50, 527–538.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. MacBethC., SoldoJ. and FloricichM.2006a. Going quantitative with 4D seismic. Geophysical Prospecting54, 303–317.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. MacBethC., StammeijerJ. and OmerodM.2006b. Seismic monitoring of pressure depletion evaluated for a UKCS gas reservoir. Geophysical Prospecting54, (in press).
    [Google Scholar]
  14. MacBethC., StephenK.D. and McInallyA.2005. The 4D signature of OWC movement due to natural production in a stacked turbidite reservoir. Geophysical Prospecting53, 183–204.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. MattaxC.C. and DaltonR.L.1990. Reservoir Simulation . SPE Monograph Series, 13. Henry Doherty Series. McInallyA. , Redondo‐LopezT. , GarnhamJ. , KunkaJ. , BrooksA. , StenstrupL.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. NesO.‐M., HoltR.M. and FjaerE.2000. The reliability of core data as input to seismic reservoir monitoring studies. Proceedings of SPE European Petroleum Conference , Paris , SPE 65180 .
  17. ParrR.S. and MarshM.2000. Development of 4D reservoir management West of Shetland. World Oil221 (9), 39–47.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. RibeiroC. and MacBethC.2004. A petroelastic‐based approach to pressure and saturation estimation using 4D seismic. 74th SEG Meeting, Denver , USA , Expanded Abstracts, 2271–2274.
  19. StaplesR., HagueP., WeisenbornT., AshtonP. and MichalekB.2005. 4D seismic for oil‐rim monitoring. Geophysical Prospecting53, 243–251.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. StephenK.D., SoldoJ., MacBethC. and ChristieM.2005. Multiple model seismic and production history matching: A case study. 14th Europec Biennial Conference, Madrid , Spain , SPE 94173.
  21. TuraA. and LumleyD.E.1999. Estimating pressure and saturation changes from time‐lapse AVO data. 69th SEG meeting, Houston , USA , Expanded Abstracts, 1655–1658.
  22. VascoD.W., Datta‐GuptaA., BehrensR., CondonP. and RickettJ.2004. Seismic imaging of reservoir flow properties: time‐lapse amplitude changes. Geophysics69, 1425–1442.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. WattsG.F.T., JizbaD., GawithD.E. and GutteridgeP.1996. Reservoir monitoring of the Magnus Field through 4D time‐lapse seismic analysis. Petroleum Geoscience2, 361–372.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1111/j.1365-2478.2006.00535.x
Loading
/content/journals/10.1111/j.1365-2478.2006.00535.x
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
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