1887

Abstract

Summary

Geologic CO2 storage in deep saline aquifers requires reliable risk assessment to evaluate and minimize unintended consequences such as potential CO2 leakage and induced seismicity. To mitigate such risks continuous monitoring and model updating is needed to improve future predictions and risk assessment. Injection-induced microseismicity has been proposed as a monitoring technique that can be used to constrain rock flow and mechanical properties. We present our ongoing work to develop a framework for assimilation of microseismic monitoring data for estimation of rock mechanical properties using coupled flow and geomechanics simulation as a forward model. Coupled flow and geomechanics simulation is combined with Mohr-Coulomb failure criterion and a stochastic measurement model, to provide a rigorous approach for prediction and interpretation of spatiotemporal distribution of discrete microseismic events in the formation. The focus of the paper is on building a geomechanics-based stochastic framework that can be used to establish physical correlation among rock mechanical properties and microseismic response data. The resulting correlations can then be used to estimate rock properties from observed microseismic clouds. In this paper, we present the developed framework and preliminary results to evaluate its performance for integration of microseismic data.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201802160
2018-09-03
2024-04-27
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Aanonsen, S., Naevdal, G., Oliver, D. et al.
    2009. The ensemble Kalman filter in reservoir engineering-a review. SPE J14(3): 393–412. doi:10.2118/117274-PA.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. BissellRC, VascoDW, AtbiM, HamdaniM, OkwelegbeM., GoldwaterMH.
    2011. A full field simulation of the In Salah gas production and CO2 storage project using a coupled geo-mechanical and thermal fluid Flow simulator. Energy Procedia4:3290–3297.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Chang, C., Zoback, MD. and Khaksar, A.
    2006. Empirical relations between rock strength and physical properties in sedimentary rocks. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering. 51(3–4), 223–237. doi:10.1016/j.petrol.2006.01.003
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Chatterjee, R. and Mukhopadhyay, M.
    2001. Petrophysical and geomechanical properties of rocks from the oilfields of the Krishna-Godavari and Cauvery Basins, India. Bulletin of Engineering Geology and the Environment. 61(2), 169–178.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Elahi, S.H. and Jafarpour, B.
    2017. A distance transform for continuous parameterization of discrete geologic facies for subsurface flow model calibration, Water Resour. Res., 53, 8226–8249, doi: 10.1002/2016WR019853.
    https://doi.org/10.1002/2016WR019853 [Google Scholar]
  6. Emerick, A. A. and Reynolds, A. C.
    2013. Ensemble smoother with multiple data assimilations. Computers and Geosciences553–15.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Evensen, G.
    2009. The ensemble Kalman filter for combined state and parameter estimation: Monte-Carlo techniques for data assimilation in large systems. IEEE Control Syst. Mag29(3) 83–104, doi:10.1109/MCS.2009.932223.
    https://doi.org/10.1109/ MCS.2009.932223 [Google Scholar]
  8. (2007), Data Assimilation: The Ensemble Kalman Filter, Springer, New York.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Eshkalak, M.O, and Mohaghegh, S.D., and Esmaili, S.
    2014. “Geomechanical Properties of Unconventional Shale Reservoirs,” Journal of Petroleum Engineering, vol. 2014, Article ID 961641, 10 pages. doi:10.1155/2014/961641
    https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/961641 [Google Scholar]
  10. Gelb, A.
    1974. Applied Optimal Estimation, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Jafarpour, B., and McLaughlin, D.
    2009. Estimating channelized reservoir permeabilities with the ensemble Kalman filter: The importance of the ensemble design, SPE J., 14(2), 374–388.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Kalman, R. E.
    1960. A new approach to linear filtering and prediction problems, J. Basic Eng., 82 (1): 35–45. doi:10.1115/1.3662552
    https://doi.org/10.1115/1.3662552 [Google Scholar]
  13. KidneyR L, ZimmerU and BoroumandN.
    2010. Impact of distance dependent location dispersion error on interpretation of microseismic event distributions Leading Edge29284–9.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Naevdal, G., Johnsen, L., Aanonsen, S. et al.
    2005. Reservoir monitoring and continuous model updating using ensemble Kalman filter, SPE J. 10(1): 66–74.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Osypov, K., O’Briain, M., Whitfield, P and et al.
    2011. Quantifying Structural Uncertainty in Anisotropic Model Building and Depth Imaging: Hild Case Study. 73rd EAGE Conference and Exhibition incorporating SPE EUROPEC 2011. DOI: 10.3997/2214‑4609.20149165.
    https://doi.org/10.3997/2214-4609.20149165 [Google Scholar]
  16. RutqvistJ, VascoD, MyerL.
    2010. Coupled reservoir-geomechanical analysis of CO2 injection and ground deformations at In Salah, Algeria. Int J Greenh Gas Control4:225–230.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Scott, D.W.
    (1992), Multivariate Density Estimation, JohnWiley, New York.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Skjervheim, J. A., G.Evensen, S.Aanonsen, B. O.Ruud, and T. A.Johansen
    (2007), Incorporating 4D seismic data in reservoir simulation models using ensemble Kalman filter, SPE J. 12(3): 282–292, SPE-95789-PA.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Sone, H. and ZobackMD.
    2013. “Mechanical properties of shale-gas reservoir rocks — Part 1: Static and dynamic elastic properties and anisotropy.” GEOPHYSICS, 78(5), D381–D392. doi:10.1190/geo2013-0050.1
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Stork, A.L., Verdon, J.P. and KendallJ.M.
    2014. Assessing the Effect of Velocity Model Accuracy on Microseismic Interpretation at the In Salah Carbon Capture and Storage Site. Energy Procedia. 63, 4385–4393. doi:10.1016/j.egypro.2014.11.473.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Tarrahi, M. and B.Jafarpour
    (2012), Inference of permeability distribution from injection-induced discrete microseismic events with kernel density estimation and ensemble Kalman filter, Water Resour. Res., 48, W10506, doi:10.1029/2012WR011920.
    https://doi.org/10.1029/2012WR011920 [Google Scholar]
  22. VerdonJP, KendallJM, WhiteDJ, AngusDA.
    2011. Linking microseismic event observations with geomechanical models to minimize the risks of storing CO2 in geological formations. Earth Planet Sci Lett305:143–152.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Zhou, H., Zhang, W., and Zhang, J.
    2016. Downhole microseismic monitoring for low signal-to-noise ratio events. Journal of Geophysics and Engineering. 13(5).
    [Google Scholar]
  24. ZhouR, HuangL, RutledgeJ.
    2010. Microseismic event location for monitoring CO2 injection using double-difference tomography. Lead Edge29:201–214.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. ZobackMD.
    2010. The potential for triggered seismicity associated with geologic sequestration of CO2 in saline aquifers. American Geophysical Union (AGU), EOS Trans. AGU, 91(52), Fall Meeting, Suppl., Abstract NH11C-01.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Zorn, E, Hammack, R., Harbert, W. and Kumar, A.
    2017. “Geomechanical lithology-based analysis of microseismicity in organic shale sequences: A Pennsylvania Marcellus Shale example.” The Leading Edge, 36(10), 845–851.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201802160
Loading
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201802160
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