Post on 08-Feb-2016
description
Induced Seismicity Consortium (ISC)
Quarterly Review Meeting, Q2-2013
Quantifying Seismic Hazard from Subsurface Fluid Injection and Production (SFIP) for
Shale Gas and Oil Reservoirs RPSEA-RFP2012UN001
Los Angeles, CA, July 2, 2013
Fred Aminzadeh / Debotyam Maity,
Objectives
IS related environment
al safety concerns
IS modeling/ prediction
tools including advanced
algorithms
Impact prediction including
stress & fault modeling
Operational parameter selection
methodology
Sites in North America with documented IS caused by or likely related to energy developments (NRC Report, 2012).
MEQ characterization and observation of possible fault activation with low b-values (Maxwell et al., 2011)
Main Research Areas Novel data acquisition
program to utilize perf shots as controlled sources.
Utilize MEQ/ EM data through optimized “dual-array” survey design.
Characterize subsurface geomechanics for improved understanding of stress regimes, etc.
Model relationships between seismicity, derived attributes and UOG operational parameters
Hazard prediction (in relation to IS) tools and mitigation framework.
Task 1: Seismic while perforation (SWP)
Schematic representation of SWP system for potential deployment under actual field conditions.
Design of basic framework including in-
depth analysis of design, deployment
and processing/ analysis issues.
Preliminary processing & analysis
based on defined framework to validate
this novel technique.
DELIVERABLES
Applicability limited to
completions involving
perforations
Research necessary to
understand the limits of perfs
as sources
Characterize formations of interest for necessary
elements within modeling framework
Task 2: Joint EM/ MEQ survey
(a) MEQ tomography (Lees et al., 2000) and (b) MT tomography (Newman et al., 2008) for Coso Geothermal field.
Optimization results for 4 wellbore arrays based on moment tensor inversion workflow. (Maity et al., 2013a)
Optimum survey design methodology for joint
EM/ MEQ surveys (multi-array deployments).
Spatially & temporally cataloged geophysical
data from test site for future reference.
DELIVERABLES
Synchronized time lapse EM/ MEQ
data collection
Real time injection & fluid front control to
reduce IS hazards
Joint optimization approach to minimize
costs and maximize operational benefits
5
Microseismic Waves Created By Small-Scale Fracturing
Surface Sources + Receivers
Geologic Model
Velocity Model
Treatment WellVertical + Lateral
Observation Well
Target Formation
Task 3: Characterizing reservoir properties
(a) Bulk Modulus, (b) Hydrostatic stress, (c) Tangential weakness, (d) fracture attribute, (e) Extensional stress, (f) Normal weakness, (g) Fracture expandability and (h) fracture permeability mapped using MEQ data from a geothermal field (Maity et al., 2013b)
(a) (b)
(c) (d)
(e)
(f) (g) (h)
Geomechanical and other reservoir
property models including uncertainty
estimates.
DELIVERABLES
Better understand
in-situ geomechanics
to improve injection
Avoid areas of potential
concern based on mapped attributes
Maximize utilization of collected and
interpreted data (Task 2).
Task 4: ANN for Modeling Induced Seismicity
Predictive tool to better understand seismicity as it relates to observed attributes SFIP Operational Parameters
Use ANN to model induced seismicity,
operational regime and geophysical attributes.
DELIVERABLES
Task 5: Probabilistic models for Seismicity
Hierarchical probabilistic model to predict failure
A hierarchical probabilistic model for the
operational parameters which is calibrated
based upon the collected seismic data
Hazards maps that reflect the interaction
between uncertainties, models, and risks and
that provide a visual aid for decision-making.
DELIVERABLES
Extensive uncertainty and
risk analysis
Understanding impact of uncertainty on final
hazard estimates
Model parameters to reflect subscale effects,
based on MaxEnt.
Task 6: Hazard mitigation
Traffic Light system (Bommer et al. 2006)
A “Safe SFIP Operation” system for different
operational parameters and related conditions.
Necessary documentation support for software
modeling tool and expandability will be critical in the
design approach selected.
DELIVERABLES
Typical evaluations needed for hazard and risk analysis (NRC Report, 2012)
Real time data acquisition/
analysis
Designed complexity to incorporate
complex intra-property relationships
Schedule & milestones