1887
PDF

Abstract

Summary

The GeoCquest Field Validation (GFV) experiment aims to test and refine the approaches developed for predicting plume migration and trapping using high-resolution simulations. However, the multi-physics problem, highly nonlinear governing equations, necessity for high spatial and fine temporal resolution, and inherent uncertainty in the subsurface leads to computationally expensive numerical simulations that can take up to a week to run using conventional methods. Therefore, a U-FNO machine learning model was developed to maintain the complexity and high resolution of the simulations while providing a faster alternative that was then used to estimate breakthrough times at the monitoring well and characterize the uncertainty associated with the experiment. This model can also be used to examine reservoir characteristics, history match to PNL data and optimize injection strategies for trapping. The model created results in over 80,000x speed up in simulation time. Our model achieved a plume error of 3.2% for the training dataset and 6% for the test set. We used the model to understand the probability of CO reaching the monitoring well. We found that by day 23 of injection, there was over an 80% probability that CO would reach the monitoring well.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.202522035
2025-09-01
2026-02-11
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/2214-4609/2025/wccus/35.html?itemId=/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.202522035&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Benson, S. M., Allison, M., Bason, D., Callas, C., Dickinson, J., Durlofsky, L. J., Haese, R., Matthai, S., Mishra, A., Mortazavi, A., Spurin, C., Tchelepi, H., Volkov, O., Watson, M., & Cook, P. (2024, October). GeoCquest field validation project: Investigating the role of geological heterogeneity on plume migration and trapping. 17th International Conference on Greenhouse Gas Control Technologies.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Mishra, A., Kurtev, K. D., & Haese, R. R. (2020). Composite rock types as part of a workflow for the integration of mm-to cm-scale lithological heterogeneity in static reservoir models. Marine and Petroleum Geology, 114, 104240. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2020.104240
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Mishra, A., Mortazavi, S. A., Dickinson, J., & Haese, R. R. (2025). Improved representation of sub-wireline scale lithological heterogeneity in geological models. Marine and Petroleum Geology, 174, 107322. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpetgeo.2025.107322
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Mo, S., Zhu, Y., Zabaras, N., Shi, X., & Wu, J. (2019). Deep Convolutional Encoder‐Decoder Networks for Uncertainty Quantification of Dynamic Multiphase Flow in Heterogeneous Media. Water Resources Research, 55(1), 703–728. https://doi.org/10.1029/2018WR023528
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Mortazavi, S. A. (2024). GeoCquest Field Validation Project Geomodel Report, Research Project No. 04.2_GCQ.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Mortazavi, S. A., Mishra, A., Dickinson, J., & Haese, R. R. (2025). Reducing the uncertainty in the distribution of cm-scale rock properties in the near well-bore region. Frontiers in Earth Science, 12. https://doi.org/10.3389/feart.2024.1508031
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Tang, M., Liu, Y., & Durlofsky, L. J. (2020). A deep-learning-based surrogate model for data assimilation in dynamic subsurface flow problems. Journal of Computational Physics, 413, 109456. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2020.109456
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Wen, G., Hay, C., & Benson, S. M. (2021). CCSNet: A deep learning modeling suite for CO2 storage. Advances in Water Resources, 155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advwatres.2021.104009
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Wen, G., Li, Z., Azizzadenesheli, K., Anandkumar, A., & Benson, S. M. (2022). U-FNO—An enhanced Fourier neural operator-based deep-learning model for multiphase flow. Advances in Water Resources, 163, 104180. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advwatres.2022.104180
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Zhu, Y., & Zabaras, N. (2018). Bayesian deep convolutional encoder–decoder networks for surrogate modeling and uncertainty quantification. Journal of Computational Physics, 366, 415–447. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcp.2018.04.018
    [Google Scholar]
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.202522035
Loading
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.202522035
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