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