Download the document - Global CCS Institute

More documents

Recommendations

Info

2.1.2 Data reviewPublically-available data for the SW Hub project span from the early 1960’s to the present day. A firstset of seismic lines had been collected and processed in the early 1960’s and 1970’s, and some of theselines were reprocessed in the early 1990’s. The majority of these lines lack any form of navigationaldata and have extremely low S/N ratios due to the data having been acquired with low fold and largegroup intervals. Data quality is further reduced by the unfavourable surface conditions as a result ofcoastal limestones and sand dunes. Lines shot in the dipping direction have generally better S/N ratiosthan lines shot along the strike of major N-S faults. Given that new seismic lines were collected in 2011(Figure 2.4), we used one of those lines (GA2011-LL1) to derive a conceptual model that is characteristicfor the situation in the SW Hub Project target region. None of the seismic data were processed withthe aim of obtaining of true-amplitude migrated sections that would be necessary to tie the seismic tothe existing wells. The aim of the seismic processing has been to provide much-needed images of thestructure.None of the existing well logs intersect the new seismic lines. The closest well is Lake Preston 1 nearthe eastern starting point of the seismic Line GA2011-LL1. The nearest core is in the Pinjarra 1 well,several kilometres north of the SW Hub Project. It is hoped that the paucity of well-logging data willbe addressed by the Harvey-1 well which was drilled between January and February, 2012. This wellwill help tie the seismic lines to well information, once the data have been reprocessed to produce trueamplitude migrated sections. The term ’true amplitude’ has different meanings in seismic processingdepending on application. We refer to true amplitude migrated (Schleicher et al., 1993; Zhang et al.,2001; Ekren and Ursin, 1999, amongst others) sections as seismic sections that have been processedso that reflector amplitudes relate directly to the change in rock properties that cause them – primaryreflections that are freed of their geometrical spreading loss.Regional potential field data over the SW Hub were interpreted by Iasky and Lockwood (2004). Theyshow the Harvey Ridge as a basement high in a moderate anomalous gravity low. Regional magneticintensity data are largely featureless in the SH Hub region. Depth to basement modelled from gravity ispresented in Figure 2.5.14 |
GA2011-6GA2011-4GA2011-5GA2011-3GA2011-2EGA2011-1ZFigure 2.4: 2011 Seismic survey data for SW Hub. The view is from the North looking South as indicatedby pointers at the lower right of the image, and line numbers are indicated. LinesGA2011-1 to 3 are oriented East-West while lines GA2011-4 to 6 are oriented South-North.The conceptual models are based on Lines GA2011-1 and GA2011-2.| 15
Page 1 and 2: www.csiro.auA deployment strategy f
Page 3: Response to referee’s commentsThi
Page 6 and 7: This project identified the followi
Page 8: 4.2.3 Marine electromagnetics . . .
Page 12 and 13: This page intentionally left blank.
Page 18 and 19: and Hoversten, 2006, 2005; Wells et
Page 20: Fundamentally, CO 2 detectability i
Page 24 and 25: which rises. Eke et al. (2011) reco
Page 26 and 27: • Rock physics uncertainties are
Page 28 and 29: 2.1 South West Hub CCS ProjectThe S
Page 32 and 33: GSWA Record 2004/8Gravity and magne
Page 34 and 35: −32˚30'115˚30'116˚00'−32˚30
Page 36 and 37: 0cdp100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
Page 38 and 39: W
Page 40 and 41: Figure 2.12: The Seaspray depressio
Page 42 and 43: 2.2.2 Data reviewAs might be expect
Page 45 and 46: 0South-WestNorth-East2depth (km)46F
Page 47 and 48: 3 Rock physics relationshipsNo exta
Page 49 and 50: For the reservoir member a porosity
Page 51 and 52: 3.1.2 Clean sandstone modelThe foll
Page 53 and 54: 3.2 Electrical propertiesThe model
Page 55 and 56: 300Lesueur project GEMTIP Rock phys
Page 57 and 58: 4 Geophysical remote sensing techni
Page 59 and 60: 0500100021.81.61.4 T (ms) 150
Page 61 and 62: 108A S/A N64202000 2100 2200 2300 2
Page 63 and 64: Figure 4.5: The seismic lines super
Page 65 and 66: 4.1.2 Data processingThe end goal o
Page 67 and 68: 4.1.3 1D Reflection seismicsSeismic
Page 69 and 70: the detectability of CO 2 when only
Page 71 and 72: 4.1.4 2D Reflection seismicsModelli
Page 73 and 74: (a) Baseline velocity model(b) Velo
Page 75 and 76: (a) Baseline and 2.5% CO 2 saturati
Page 77 and 78: • ρ = 2.497g/cm 3 .This gives th
Page 79 and 80: !me$(ms)$Figure 4.17: Noise-free ba
Page 81 and 82:
CDP0400 time (ms)800120016002
Page 83 and 84:
5004504000.64kt1.59kt3.18kt6.37kt12
Page 85 and 86:
010020040060080014000.116001800N ra
Page 87 and 88:
Figure 4.27: Zoomed in synthetic ba
Page 89 and 90:
Figure 4.30: Zoomed view of the inj
Page 91 and 92:
4.1.6 Permanent receiver installati
Page 93 and 94:
Figure 4.33: Well 6, Zero-offset (1
Page 95 and 96:
4.1.6.2 Ocean bottom cablesFor mari
Page 97 and 98:
4.2 Electromagnetic surveying & int
Page 99 and 100:
• Clearly, the induction monitori
Page 101 and 102:
Key points to consider for applicat
Page 103 and 104:
4.2.2.1 Single-borehole electromagn
Page 105 and 106:
4.2.2.2 Separated-borehole electrom
Page 107 and 108:
The second and third examples of cr
Page 109 and 110:
0 A 100 m 50010001500 2000 250010
Page 111 and 112:
0Wonnerup, 1000 m target; Tx 1200m
Page 113 and 114:
Downloaded 23 Sep 2010 to 130.116.1
Page 115 and 116:
ceiver offset from the transmitter
Page 117 and 118:
Figure 4.50: Dependence of mCSEM re
Page 119 and 120:
The second variation of Figure 4.48
Page 121 and 122:
0 A EE Component0B E Z Component0 C
Page 123 and 124:
The third variation of Figure 4.48
Page 125 and 126:
0 A EE Component0B E Z Component0 C
Page 127 and 128:
4.2.4 Ground electromagneticsThe mC
Page 129 and 130:
Table 4.7: LOTEM Gate parameters. T
Page 131 and 132:
Response Background1.0101.0051.000
Page 133 and 134:
Response Background1.101.051.000.9
Page 135 and 136:
Primary Industries, 2011). However,
Page 137 and 138:
Effect of drill hole offset0DDH10DD
Page 139 and 140:
Microseismic monitoring ideally beg
Page 141 and 142:
ferromagnetic magnet which has a te
Page 143 and 144:
5 Monitoring & verification strateg
Page 145 and 146:
5.1 General recommendations & strat
Page 147 and 148:
Table 5.2: Suitability of geophysic
Page 149 and 150:
confused with seepage. In this case
Page 151 and 152:
6 ConclusionsThis report has discus
Page 153 and 154:
7 Recommendations for future resear
Page 155 and 156:
ReferencesAl-Ali, Z. A., M. H. Al-B
Page 157 and 158:
Du, J., D. L. Tilbrook, J. C. Macfa
Page 159 and 160:
JafarGandomi, A., and A. Curtis, 20
Page 161 and 162:
Schilling, F., G. Borm, H. Würdema
Page 163 and 164:
Yan, W., S. Huang, and E. H. Stenby
Page 165 and 166:
ACO 2 PropertiesThis Appendix gives
Page 167 and 168:
BSeismic preprocessing workflowThe
Page 169 and 170:
CSeismic data processing for quanti
Page 171 and 172:
Preprocessing prior to any stack wi
Page 173 and 174:
Recent developments, such as target
Page 175 and 176:
and should not be used for quantita
Page 177 and 178:
DGeophysical software used in the p
Page 179:
EProject detailsThis section lists
show all

Download the document - Global CCS Institute

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?