1887

Abstract

Summary

Full Waveform Inversion (FWI) and Controlled Source Electro-Magnetic (CSEM) inversion can provide quantitative estimates of useful subsurface properties. In the context of CO2 monitoring, FWI has the capability to characterize velocity changes induced by CO2 injection and accurately locate the CO2 plume, while CSEM can be useful to determine the CO2 saturation. Quantifying the uncertainty of the reconstructed parameters is however challenging. In this study, we assess the reliability of the results obtained using CSEM and FWI when monitoring CO2 storage at the Sleipner pilot in the North Sea. The uncertainty evaluation methodology is described in a first stage. In a second stage, two CO2 monitoring examples are presented, one synthetic case using CSEM and one real data case using FWI. For the synthetic CSEM case, the inversion of the EM data has a clear effect on the uncertainty, reducing the covariance of the probability distribution for possible conductivity models. For the real, rather large-scale FWI case, computationally efficient strategies are considered. The covariance is not reduced to the same extent as for the CSEM case, but an improvement is observed. In both cases, the quantification approach provides a means to assess the quality of derived subsurface properties.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201701317
2017-06-12
2020-09-29
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Bui-Thanh, T.
    , et al., A computational framework for infinite-dimensional Bayesian inverse problems Part I: The linearized case, with application to global seismic inversion. SIAM Journal on Scientific Computing, 2013. 35(6): p. A2494–A2523.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Duffet, C. and D.Sinoquet
    , Quantifying uncertainties on the solution model of seismic tomography. Inverse problems, 2006. 22(2): p. 525.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Eliasson, P.
    , et al., A synthetic Sleipner study of CO2 quantification using controlled source electromagnetics and full waveform inversion. Energy Procedia, 2014. 63: p. 4249–4263.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Hustedt, B., S.Operto, and J.Virieux
    , Mixed-grid and staggered-grid finite-difference methods for frequency-domain acoustic wave modelling. Geophysical Journal International, 2004. 157(3): p. 1269–1296.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Rawlinson, Nicholas
    , et al. “Chapter One-Seismic Tomography and the Assessment of Uncertainty.” Advances in Geophysics55 (2014): 1–76.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Romdhane, A., E.Querendez, and C.Ravaut
    , CO2 Thin-layer Detection at the Sleipner Field with Full Waveform Inversion: Application to Synthetic and Real Data. Energy Procedia, 2014. 51: p. 281–288.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Streich, R.
    , 3D finite-difference frequency-domain modeling of controlled-source electromagnetic data: Direct solution and optimization for high accuracy. Geophysics, 2009. 74(5): p. F95–F105.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Zhu, H.
    , et al., A Bayesian approach to estimate uncertainty for full-waveform inversion using a priori information from depth migration. Geophysics, 2016. 81(5): p. R307–R323.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201701317
Loading
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201701317
Loading

Data & Media loading...

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