1887

Abstract

Summary

We present a strategy, called Theseus 24D, to limit environmental disturbances and increase the capital efficiency of active seismic monitoring, measurement and verification (MMV) for onshore carbon capture and storage (CCS) projects. These improvements can be on the order of a 96% reduction in surface disturbances and 57% savings in capital while maintaining continuous seismic imaging in 2 or 3 dimensions. Theseus 24D is a strategy based on several concepts, the first being the Ship of Theseus thought experiment, and a reduction to the absurd argument that repeat 3D surveys in CCS are wastefully shot. We show that the uses of 3D repeat surveys in CCS are limited onshore, and their imaging areas should be reduced. The second key idea is that of 24D, which is the integration of repeat 2D monitoring with the baseline 3D. 24D relies on a novel use of wavefield reconstruction to produce any number and orientation of baseline 2D lines from the baseline 3D for subsequent 2D time lapse comparisons. We demonstrate the cost and environmental savings from a scheduling illustration and show that the 24D method can work through a 3D modeling and processing experiment.

© EAGE Publications BV
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.202585024
2025-10-21
2026-01-21

  • From This Site

    /content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.202585024
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Brun, V., J.De Sousa, E.Morgan, 2022, CO2 injection detection using light time-lapse seismic monitoring, 83rd EAGE Annual Conference & Exhibition, 1–5, DOI: https://doi.org/10.3997/2214-4609.202210275
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Cinar, Yildiray, O.Bukhteeva, P.Neal, 2008, CO2 storage in low permeability formations, 2008 SPE Improved Oil Recovery Symposium, SPE 114028
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Freeman, C., R.Dhawan, H.Blanke, and J.Hopkins, 2024, Quest carbon capture and storage – 4D seismic monitoring and geologic controls on plume migration, Proceedings of the 17th Greenhouse Gas Control Technologies Conference, https://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.5066124
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Furre, Anne-Kari, O.Eiken, H.Alnes, J.Vevatne, and A.Kiaer, 2017, 20 years of monitoring CO2-injection at Sleipner, Energy Procedia, 114, 3916–3926, DOI: 10.1016/j.egypro.2017.03.1523
     https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2017.03.1523 [Google Scholar]
  5. Furre, A.-K., R.Meneguolo, L.Pinturier, and K.Bakke, 2020, Planning deep subsurface CO2 storage monitoring for the Norwegian full-scale CCS project: First Break, 38, no 10, 55–60, doi: 10.3997/1365‑2397.fb2020074
     https://doi.org/10.3997/1365-2397.fb2020074 [Google Scholar]
  6. Grant, Timothy, and D.Morgan, 2018, Best Practices: CO2 Storage Lecture – Carnagie Mellon University, Carbon Capture and Storage Short Course, 2/18, NETL-PUB-21697, OSTI 1547306
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Harvey, Stephen, J.Hopkins, H.Kuehl, S. O’Brien, and A.Mateeva, 2021, Quest CCS Facility: Time-Lapse Seismic Campaigns, 15th International Conference on Greenhouse Gas Control Technologies, GHGT-15, http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3817070
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Hunt, L., E.Street, G.Hack, J.Schweigert, and M.Allen, 2024, Theseus 24D Optimized Seismic CCS MMV Method Part 3: Experimental results, Canadian Journal of Exploration Geophysics, 47(1), 48–73.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Moradi, S., and D.Lawton, 2013, Theoretical detectability of CO2 at a CCS project in Alberta, SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts 2013, 3475–3479, DOI:10.1190/segam2013‑1212.1
     https://doi.org/10.1190/segam2013-1212.1 [Google Scholar]
  10. Nordbotten, Jan, M.Celia, S.Bachu, 2005, Injection and storage of CO2 in deep saline aquifers: analytical solution for CO2 plume evolution during injection, J. Transp Porous Med (2005)58:339–360, DOI 10.1007/s11242‑004‑0670‑9
     https://doi.org/10.1007/s11242-004-0670-9 [Google Scholar]
  11. Sen, A., R.Gosh, and N.Vedanti, 2016, Saturation estimation from 4D seismic data from Sleipner field by capillary pressure based rock physics model, Society of Exploration Geophysicists Annual Meeting, 3314–3322, DOI: 10.1190/segam2016‑13952077.1
     https://doi.org/10.1190/segam2016-13952077.1 [Google Scholar]
  12. Trad, D., 2009, Five Dimensional Interpolation: Recovering from acquisition constraints, Geophysics, 74(6), V123–V132. https://doi.org/10.1190/1.3245216
     [Google Scholar]
  13. White, Don, K.Harris, L.Roach, M.Robertson, 2019, 7 years of 4D seismic monitoring at the Aquistore CO2 Storage Site, Saskatchewan, Canada, SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts 2019, 4918–4922, DOI:10.1190/segam2019-3216776.1
     [Google Scholar]
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.202585024
Loading
Theseus 24D Parsimonious Active Seismic Monitoring with Continuous Imaging
Conference Proceedings 2025, 1 (2025); https://doi.org/10.3997/2214-4609.202585024
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.202585024
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.202585024
Loading

Data & Media loading...

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