Onshore electromagnetic reservoir monitoring

Information

  • Patent Grant
  • 10302796
  • Patent Number
    10,302,796
  • Date Filed
    Wednesday, November 26, 2014
    9 years ago
  • Date Issued
    Tuesday, May 28, 2019
    5 years ago
Abstract
Onshore electromagnetic (EM) reservoir monitoring systems and methods, including a system with a light source producing a light beam and an EM sensor array positioned above ground or buried underground over one or more regions of interest within a subterranean formation, the array coupled to the light source with an optical fiber. An EM sensor modulates the interrogation light beam in response to an EM signal induced into the subterranean formation by an EM source. The system further includes a processor controlling the light source, processing modulated light received from the array, and collecting data with the array to produce EM surveys, each EM survey based on data sets collected at different times. The EM sensor is physically isolated from a surrounding environment. The surveys are combined to produce a time lapse earth model of the regions of interest.
Description
BACKGROUND

Oil field operators dedicate significant resources to improve the recovery of hydrocarbons from reservoirs while reducing recovery costs. To achieve these goals, reservoir engineers both monitor the current state of the reservoir and attempt to predict future behavior given a set of current and/or postulated conditions. Reservoir monitoring, sometimes referred to as reservoir surveillance, involves the regular collection and monitoring of measured near-wellbore production data from within and around the wells of a reservoir. Such data may be collected using sensors installed inline along production tubing introduced into the well. The data may include, but is not limited to, water saturation, water and oil cuts, fluid pressure and fluid flow rates, is generally collected at a fixed, regular interval (e.g., once per minute) and is monitored in real-time by field personnel. As the data is collected, it is archived into a historical database.


The production and survey data is incorporated into simulations that are executed as part of the well surveillance and model the behavior of the entire reservoir. Such simulations predict the current overall state, producing simulated interwell data values both near and at a distance from the wellbore. Simulated near-wellbore interwell data is regularly correlated against measured near-wellbore data, with modeling parameters being adjusted as needed to reduce the error between simulated and measured data. Once so adjusted, the simulated interwell data, both near and at a distance from the wellbore, may be relied upon to assess the overall state of the reservoir.


The collected production data, however, mostly reflects conditions immediately around the reservoir wells. To provide a more complete picture of the state of the reservoir, periodic surveys of the reservoir are performed. Such surveys can include large scale electromagnetic (EM) surveys that may be performed months or even years apart. The surveys can subsequently be combined to provide a time-lapse image of a reservoir to identify trends and adjust production strategies to optimize the production of the reservoir.


However, as a result of the large periods of time between surveys, the use of permanently deployed sensors (i.e., sensors expected to be deployed once and operated for the predicted lifespan of a reservoir) has largely been considered impractical. This is because the environments to which EM sensors are exposed are generally too harsh to operate existing sensors reliably over such long periods and too inaccessible to perform any sort of equipment maintenance, failure diagnosis or repair in a cost effective manner, if at all. This is true of both offshore and onshore environments. Offshore reservoirs may be located at significant depths where the pressure and salinity can take its toll on equipment and accessibility may be limited to remotely operated vehicles with limited capabilities and high deployment and operations costs. Onshore reservoirs may appear to be more accessible, but because onshore sensors and their corresponding communication and/or power networks must be buried underground, the cost of equipment maintenance, failure diagnosis and repair can still be substantial and in some cases prohibitive. Even absent overt failures, these hostile environments can still produce long-term shifts in the measurements taken by the sensors that render the measurements inconsistent as between surveys and preclude any meaningful correlation of the survey data.





BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

Accordingly, there are disclosed herein methods and systems for electromagnetic (EM) reservoir monitoring. In the drawings:



FIG. 1A shows an offshore subsea deployment of an illustrative EM reservoir monitoring system.



FIG. 1B shows an onshore field deployment of an illustrative EM reservoir monitoring system.



FIGS. 2A-2C show illustrative optical EM sensor array configurations.



FIG. 3 shows an illustrative optical EM sensor.



FIGS. 4A-4C show illustrative optical cavity transducer.



FIG. 5 shows an illustrative piezoelectric optical transducer.



FIG. 6 shows an illustrative magnetostrictive optical transducer.



FIG. 7A shows an illustrative offshore system for controlling and processing data from an optical EM sensor array.



FIG. 7B shows an illustrative onshore system for controlling and processing data from an optical EM sensor array.



FIG. 8 shows an illustrative method for operating an optical EM sensor array.





It should be understood that the drawings and corresponding detailed description do not limit the disclosure, but on the contrary, they provide the foundation for understanding all modifications, equivalents, and alternatives falling within the scope of the appended claims.


DETAILED DESCRIPTION

The paragraphs that follow describe illustrative systems and methods for electromagnetic (EM) reservoir monitoring. Illustrative production environments are first described, followed by a description of various illustrative reservoir surveillance sensor array configurations suitable for use with the disclosed systems and methods. Illustrative sensors usable within the disclosed arrays are then disclosed, together with examples of various optical transducers suitable for incorporation into the disclosed sensors. Finally, an illustrative EM reservoir monitoring method is presented within the context of an illustrative system and a software-based implementation by said system.


The disclosed systems and methods are best understood in the context of the larger systems in which they operate. Accordingly, FIG. 1A shows an illustrative offshore production platform 100 and corresponding subsea reservoir 110A. For the illustrative platform shown, fluids such as crude oil and natural gas are extracted through subsea well head 108A and flow line 102 and transported to platform 100, where the separation of oil, water and natural gas is performed. The separated fluids may then be stored for later transfer to a tanker for transport. Alternatively, in other illustrative embodiments, the platform may be coupled to an offshore pipeline through which the separated fluids can be transported onshore for further processing.


The platform also houses a processing and control system 750 which couples to a surface interface module 710. Surface interface module 710 in turn couples to subsea interface module 730 through umbilical 104, providing power from the surface to the equipment on the sea bottom. It should be noted that although described in terms of a sea or ocean, the systems and methods described herein are suitable for use within a variety of bodies of water such as, for example, a lake, a bay or a transition zone. Subsea interface module 730 couples to an array of EM sensors 300 through optical fiber 302. In other illustrative embodiments, a tubing encapsulated conductor (TEC) may be used instead of an optical fiber. A TEC can include multiple fibers and conductors, allowing a wide variety of sensors and subsea equipment to be interconnected through a single trunk cable capable of enduring the harsh conditions at the sea bottom.


Each EM sensor 300 reacts to EM signals induced into the formation below seabed 112A by either natural EM sources or one or more controlled EM sources housed within subsea interface module 730, though in other embodiments the controlled EM source(s) could be located elsewhere, for example in a separate housing on seabed 112A or within the casing of a completed reservoir well. In at least some illustrative embodiments, a light source within subsea interface module 730 directs light through optical fiber 302 and then triggers a controlled EM source, which induces EM signals within formation 114. These EM signals are received by one or more EM sensors 300, causing the sensors to modulate the interrogation light beam. Each sensor's modulation maybe distinguished by any of a number of known techniques such as time multiplexing or frequency multiplexing. The modulated beam is directed back to a detector within subsea interface module 730, where the modulation is encoded and sent to the surface for further processing. The processed data may then be used to assess the resistivity of the various formation layers, which in turn may be used to characterize the composition of the formation (e.g., using any of a number of known inversion techniques) and to identify the current state of subsea reservoir 110A.


A similar configuration for onshore reservoir monitoring is shown in FIG. 1B. In at least some illustrative embodiments, however, the array of sensors 300 and optical fiber 302 is instead buried under the surface of field 112B over the reservoir to protect the sensors from damage by people, animals and vehicles. Also, onshore wellhead 108B couples to a pipeline 116, and a single field interface module 790 couples to processing and control system 750 and optical EM sensors 300 via optical fiber 302. Beyond these differences, the illustrative onshore EM reservoir monitoring system shown of FIG. 1B operates in essentially the same manner as the illustrative offshore system of FIG. 1A.


The embodiments of both FIGS. 1A and 1B show a single optical fiber running the length of the array through each sensor 300 in series. This configuration is shown in more detail in FIG. 2A where a light source 202 emits light in a continuous beam. A circulator 204 directs the light along optical fiber 302. The light travels along the optical fiber 302, interacting with each sensor 300 before reflecting off the end of the cable and returning to circulator 204 via sensors 300. The circulator directs the reflected light to a light detector 208. The light detector 208 separates the measurements associated with different sensors 300, e.g., via frequency multiplexing. In such a frequency multiplexed embodiment, each sensor 300 affects only a narrow wavelength band of the light beam, and each sensor is designed to affect a different wavelength band.


Other sensor array and optical fiber configurations are also suitable for use with the disclosed systems and methods. For example, in FIG. 2B light source 202 emits light in short pulses. Each sensor 300 is coupled to the main optical fiber 302 via a splitter 206. The splitters direct a small fraction of the light from the optical fiber to the sensor, e.g., 1% to 4%. The sensor 300 interacts with the light and reflects it back to the detector 208 via the splitter, the main fiber, and the circulator. Due to the different travel distances, each pulse of light from source 202 results in a sequence of return pulses, with the first pulse arriving from the nearest sensor 300, the second pulse arriving from the second nearest sensor, etc. This arrangement enables the detector to separate the sensor measurements on a time multiplexed basis.


The arrangements of FIGS. 2A and 2B are both reflective arrangements in which the light reflects from a fiber termination point. They can each be converted to a transmissive arrangement in which the termination point is replaced by a return fiber that communicates the light back to the surface. FIG. 2C shows an example of such an arrangement for the configuration of FIG. 2B. A return fiber is coupled to each of the sensors via a splitter to collect the light from the sensors 300 and direct it to a light detector 208.


Many illustrative sensor configurations suitable for use in the disclosed embodiments may be implemented. For example, multiple sensors may be coupled in series on each branch of the FIG. 2B, 2C arrangements. A combination of time division, frequency division and wavelength division multiplexing could be used to separate the individual sensor measurements. In at least some frequency division multiplexing embodiments, each sensor measures variations of the electromagnetic fields at different frequencies, preferably by each sensor (e.g., each monitoring a different region of the reservoir) detecting field variations created by a local electromagnetic signal source, each source operating at a different frequency. Other sensor configurations will become apparent to those of ordinary skill in the art and all such configurations are within the scope of the present disclosure.


The use of the above-described sensor arrays provides the capability of monitoring the state of reservoirs covering larger geographic expanses, whether onshore or offshore. Nonetheless, in order to provide long-term data that can be used to assess changes as hydrocarbons are extracted from a reservoir, it is desirable to perform multiple surveys of the reservoir, such as EM surveys, separated by one or more months, and in some instances separated by one or more years. Such data can be useful in identifying and predicting long-term reductions in the productivity of the reservoir. In at least some illustrative embodiments, data acquired over such long periods of time is used to build a time lapse reservoir model that can be used to predict the long-term dynamic behavior of the reservoir. Such predictions enable reservoir engineers to make changes in production elements such as, for example, the location and configuration of injector wells over time and thus optimize the overall production of the reservoir over its expected lifespan.


In at least some illustrative embodiments, the sensor 300 configuration shown in FIG. 3 is used to provide a degree of sensor stability that produces survey data separated by months or years that can be combined and relied upon to predict reservoir behavior. Such stability is achieved at least in part by isolating several of the components of sensor 300 (e.g., electrode 308B and transducer 350) from the surrounding environment. The configuration shown in the example of FIG. 3 isolates electrode 308B by encapsulating it with a protective layer 308A (e.g., a fiberglass encapsulation), and this encapsulation protects the conductor from the adverse effects of the harsh environments in which such sensors are frequently deployed (e.g., high salinity ocean subsea environments, subterranean formation soils containing highly reactive minerals, etc.). The combination of such electrodes with an encapsulating layer creates two sensing surfaces 308 and 310 that are capacitively coupled to their immediate external environment (e.g., to the body of water around the subsea array or the subsea formation of FIG. 1A, or to the subterranean formation beneath the field of FIG. 1B). In other illustrative embodiments, the electrodes are isolated from their surrounding environment by passivating the electrodes, rather than encapsulating them. In still other illustrative embodiments, the electrodes are omitted and the isolated transducer 350 detects the EM signals directly through the housing wall of sensor 300, converting the detected EM signals into modulated optical pulses.


In the example embodiment of FIG. 3, the electric potential produced across the two capacitive electrodes by the EM signals is presented to an optical transducer within the sealed sensor 300, which modulates the interrogation light beam transmitted through optical fiber 302 as previously described. Because the sensor 300 of the illustrative embodiment of FIG. 3 is sealed and the electrodes are protected by the encapsulating layer from environmental conditions and/or chemicals that can degrade the electrodes and/or other sensor components, the sensor can be incorporated into a sensor array that is deployed once and operated for the life of the reservoir. The stability of the electrodes helps to ensure that EM signal measurements provided by the illustrative sensor 300 and taken months or years apart can be relied upon to generate a time-lapse earth model of the reservoir over the lifespan of the reservoir. The lack of active components requiring batteries or external power, as well as the use of optical fibers rather than electrical conductors to transmit data, further enhance the long-term stability and reliability of the illustrative sensor 300 and arrays that incorporate such sensors.


A number of different optical transducers that convert the electric potential produced across sensing surfaces 308 and 310 of illustrative sensor 300 into a modulation of the interrogation light beam transmitted through optical fiber 302 may be suitable for incorporation into sensor 300. FIG. 4A shows an illustrative micro-opto-electro-mechanical system (MOEMS) embodiment of transducer 350 suitable for use in a wavelength multiplexed sensor array. The illustrative MOEMS transducer is built upon a substrate 408, which may include transparent materials such as silicon, which is transparent to near-infrared light, or an opening or other optical path that permits a light beam 412 to traverse the transducer, entering the transducer as light beam 412a, passing through the optical cavity of the transducer as light beam 412b, and exiting the optical cavity as light beam 412c. Substrate 408 is covered on one side by a layer 404a to create a surface that is reflective over a portion of the light spectrum, and on the other side by an antireflection layer 410. A support structure 406 attaches to (or is integral with) substrate 408 and suspends an opposing movable layer 404b (which also has a reflective surface) and a field sensitive element 402 using four flexible members or “beams” 406a.


Beams 406a are formed from a resilient, flexible material that enables an electric or magnetic field (depending on the compositions of field sensitive element 402) to displace the movable layer 404b along a translational axis parallel to the beam of light (as indicated by the upward and downward facing arrows). In the embodiment shown, the beams 406a provide a restoring force that returns the movable layer 404b to a neutral position in the absence of forces imposed on the field sensitive element 402, and also constrain the movement of movable layer 404b and field sensitive element 402 to a path along the aforementioned translational axis (i.e., perpendicular to the top surface of support structure 406). The displacement of layer 404b varies an optical passband of the optical cavity by changing the distance between the two partially reflective surfaces (layer 404a and moveable layer 404b). For a time-variant electromagnetic field, the movement produces a corresponding time-variance in the wavelength of that portion of the light spectrum affected by the optical cavity. The resulting optical spectrum or wavelength variation Δλ shown in FIG. 4A is directly related to the peak-to-peak magnitude of the measured field.


In at least some illustrative embodiments, the source of the light entering the optical cavity is preferably a wideband light source as shown in FIG. 4A. In the example shown, light wavelengths immediately above and below a passband wavelength of the optical cavity are blocked by destructive interference, but light at the passband frequency and sufficiently above or below the passband propagate through the optical cavity. In the example shown in FIG. 4A, a significant portion of the light with a wavelength above one of the optical cavity's passband wavelengths propagates through the cavity with little or no attenuation. This unattenuated portion of the propagated light's bandwidth is available for use by other optical cavities tuned to different passband wavelengths coupled in series along a single fiber. The optical cavities operate to together produce a wavelength multiplexed optical signal.



FIGS. 4B and 4C show more detailed embodiments of the optical transducer of FIG. 4A. The electric field E(t) to which the MOEMS transducer of FIG. 4B is exposed is generated by the electric potential produced across sensor surfaces 308 and 310 of sensor 300. The potential V(t) is applied across electrically conductive layers 416, positioned to either side of field sensitive element 402. As a result, any electrical potential induced by electromagnetic fields within the surrounding formation are applied across layers 416, which act like the plates of a parallel plate capacitor between which the electric field E(t) is induced. The derivation of the electric field E(t) is derived from the optical wavelength variations, and once the electrical potential present at sensor surfaces 308 and 310 is known, the electric or magnetic properties being measured, such as electric resistivity, electric permittivity and/or magnetic permeability and corresponding composition of the surrounding formation can be derived using any of a wide variety of known techniques, given a known transmitted excitation signal.


Similarly, the magnetic field B(z,t) to which the optical transducer is exposed is generated by an electrical potential applied across sensor surfaces 308 and 310 and thus across induction coil 424 positioned above and along the translational axis of field sensitive element 402. In the embodiment shown, the magnetic axis of the induction coil 424 is preferably oriented to be parallel to the magnetic axis of field sensitive element 402, with both magnetic axes also being preferably parallel to the translational axis of field sensitive element 402. Nonetheless, other orientations of induction coil 424 and field sensitive element 402 are contemplated and are within the scope of the present disclosure. Induction coil 424 is electrically coupled to sensor surfaces 308 and 310. As a result, any electrical potential induced by electromagnetic fields within the surrounding formation is applied across induction coil 424. After solving for the gradient of B(z,t), the field B(z,t) can be determined with an appropriate calibration of the transducer.



FIG. 5 shows another illustrative embodiment of the optical transducer 350, implemented as a variable optical path length transducer. In the embodiment of FIG. 5, the transducer 350 includes an (optional) impedance matching transformer 590 coupled between the sensor surfaces 308 and 310 and the drive electrodes of a cylinder 592 of piezoelectric material. The impedance matching transformer 590 provides an efficient way to scale the EM signal voltage to match the drive requirements for the piezoelectric cylinder.


The piezoelectric cylinder 592 is a hollow cylinder with an inner surface electrode and an outer surface electrode. The piezoelectric material is a substance that exhibits the reverse piezoelectric effect: the internal generation of a mechanical force resulting from an applied electrical field. Suitable piezoelectric materials include lead zirconate titanate (PZT), lead titanate, and lead metaniobate. For example, lead zirconate titanate crystals will change by about 0.1% of their static dimension when an electric field is applied to the material. The piezoelectric cylinder 592 is configured such that a diameter of the outer surface of the piezoelectric cylinder 592 changes when an electrical voltage is applied between the inner and outer surfaces. As a result, the diameter of the outer surface of the piezoelectric cylinder 592 is dependent on the electrical voltage applied across sensor surfaces 308 and 310.


In the embodiment of FIG. 5, a terminal portion of the optical fiber 26, including an end or terminus 94 of the optical fiber 26, is wound around the outer surface of the piezoelectric cylinder 92. The terminal portion of the optical fiber 302 is tightly wound around the outer surface of the piezoelectric cylinder 592 such that the terminal portion of the optical fiber 302 is under some initial mechanical stress. The terminus 594 is preferably attached to the outer surface of the piezoelectric cylinder 592, and may or may not have a mirrored coating or layer to reflect light (i.e., a mirrored terminus). Even in the absence of a mirrored coating, the terminus 594 may be expected to reflect a significant fraction of the incident light due to an index of refraction mismatch with the air. As the cylinder's diameter expands or contracts, so too does the cylinder's circumference, thereby stretching the length of the terminal portion of the optical fiber 302 accordingly. Any stretching of the optical fiber also increases the mechanical stress being imposed on the fiber. These two effects combine to increase the optical path length through the transducer for any light traveling to or from the terminus 594, thus producing a time shift in the arrival time of the reflected light at the detector (e.g., optical detector 208 of FIG. 2B).



FIG. 6 is a diagram of yet another illustrative embodiment of optical transducer 350, which exploits a light-leakage characteristic of optical fibers. Optical fibers typically include a transparent core surrounded by a transparent cladding material having a lower index of refraction, so that light propagating fairly parallel to the fiber's axis is trapped in the core by the phenomenon of total internal reflection. If bent too sharply, however, the angle between the light's propagation path and the cladding interface is no longer sufficient to maintain total internal reflection, enabling some portion of the light to escape from the fiber.


This light leakage characteristic can be exploited with a microbend sensor or microbender 660 such as that shown in FIG. 6. The microbender 660 includes a pair of opposed ridged elements 662A and 662B, each having a row of ridges 664 in contact with an outer surface of the optical fiber 302. The optical fiber 302 is positioned in a gap between the ridged elements 662A and 662B. The teeth 664 of the ridged elements 662A and 662B are aligned so as to intermesh. In other words, ridges on one element align with valleys in the other element and vice versa. A force or pressure that urges the ridged elements 662A and 662B toward one another causes small bends or “microbends” in the optical fiber 302 at multiple locations along the optical fiber 302. As a result, light propagating along the optical fiber 302 is attenuated by an amount dependent upon the force or pressure that urges the ridged elements 662A and 662B toward one another.


In the embodiment of FIG. 6, the ridged element 662B is mounted on a piezoelectric substrate 666 that exhibits a change in dimensions when an electric field is applied between its upper and lower surfaces. The leads from sensor surfaces 308 and 310 apply a rectified voltage signal to the upper and lower surfaces of the piezoelectric substrate 166, causing the gap to briefly close in response to the passing of a casing collar. Alternatively, the substrate 666 may be a magnetostrictive material surrounded by a coil that induces a magnetic field in response to a voltage signal from sensor surfaces 308 and 310.


As previously noted, the light beam modulated by the above-described transducers of EM sensor 300 is encoded and presented to a processing and control system that provides further processing of the collected EM survey data. FIGS. 7A and 7B show illustrative embodiments of EM reservoir monitoring systems 700A (offshore) and 700B (onshore), which both include a processing and control system 750, together with various interface modules for interfacing with an array of sensors 300. FIGS. 7A and 7B show both hardware and software components of EM reservoir monitoring systems 700A and 700B, which in at least some illustrative embodiments implement at least part of the method 800 of FIG. 8. A user may interact with control and processing system 750 of the systems 700A and 700B via keyboard 746 and pointing device 744 (e.g., a mouse) to send commands and configuration data to surface interface module 710 and subsea module 730 of FIG. 7A and to field interface module 790 of FIG. 7B.


Located within processing and control system 750 is a display interface 752, a telemetry transceiver 754, a processor 756, a peripheral interface 758, an information storage device 760, an network interface 762 and a memory 770. Bus 764 couples each of these elements to each other and transports their communications. Telemetry transceiver 754 enables the processing and control system 750 to communicate with the array of sensors 300 via surface interface module 710 and subsea interface module 730 (offshore) and via field interface module 790 (onshore). Network interface 762 enables communications with other systems (e.g., a central data processing facility via the Internet). In accordance with user input received via peripheral interface 758 and program instructions from memory 770 and/or information storage device 760, processor 756 processes telemetry information received via telemetry transceiver 754 to build and combine time-lapse reservoir models in accordance with the disclosed methods and displays the results produced by the models to the user. In at least some illustrative embodiments, the processing and control system 750 is preferably configured by software (e.g., in the form of non-volatile removable media 761) to control the EM monitoring system and to process the EM survey data as described.


In at least some illustrative embodiments, processing and control system 750 of FIG. 7A communicates with surface interface module 710, which acts as a distribution and/or concentration point for command and telemetry to and from one or more subsea interface modules 730 located on the sea bottom. Each subsea interface module 730 similarly acts as a distribution and/or concentration point between surface interface module 710 and one or more arrays of sensors 300. In the illustrative offshore embodiment shown in FIG. 7A, surface interface module includes a telemetry transceiver 712 (similar to telemetry transceiver 754), which provides a data communication interface (either wired as shown or wireless) with processing and control system 750; controller and memory 714, which executes software stored on information storage device 716, both operating in a manner similar to processor 756 and information storage device 760 to provide at least some of the functionality of surface interface module 710; power source 716, which provides power for the components of the surface interface module 710 and for subsea interface module 730; and subsea interface 720, which couples to surface interface and power distribution 732 of subsea interface module 730 and provides power and a data interface to the subsea interface module 730. Each of the components within surface interface module 710 are coupled to each other via bus 701, which provides data communication between and power to the various components.


Continuing to refer to FIG. 7A, subsea interface module 730 includes surface interface and power distribution 732, which provides the data interface with the surface and distributes power received from the surface to the components of the module; controller and memory 734, which stores and executes software that provides at least some of the functionality of the module; EM controlled source transmitter 736, which optionally provides a controlled EM source for inducing an EM signal in the surrounding formation as previously described; and fiber-optic source/detector 738, which includes one or more optical transmitters (e.g., LED lasers) that generate the interrogation light beam(s) transmitted to the array of sensors 300 via optical fiber 302, and one or more optical detectors that sense the modulated light beams received from the array of sensors via optical fiber 302 and further convert the modulated light beams into a digital signal (either electrical or optical) for transmission to the surface. Fiber optic source/detector 738 may also optionally include an optical circulator for use in single fiber systems as previously described, as well as one or more analog-to-digital (A/D) converters to convert the analog signals produced by the optical receivers to digital data suitable transmission to the surface.



FIG. 7B shows an illustrative embodiment of an EM reservoir monitoring system for onshore operation that is similar to the offshore embodiment of FIG. 7A. Continuing to refer to FIG. 7B, field interface module 790 incorporates components similar to those of both surface interface module 710 and subsea interface module 730 of the offshore embodiment, and includes telemetry transceiver 712, controller and memory 714, power source 716, information storage device 718, EM controlled source transmitter 736 and fiber-optic source/detector 738, each of which operate in the same manner as described above in the offshore embodiment of FIG. 7A.


s FIG. 8 shows an illustrative method 800, at least part of which may be implemented by software executing on processing and control system 750. It should be noted that although the embodiment of FIG. 8 shows the various software modules executing on processing and control system 750, in other illustrative embodiments some or all of the modules may be stored execute on other components within EM reservoir monitoring systems 700A or 700B, including, e.g., controller and memory 714 of surface interface module 710, controller and memory 734 of subsea interface module 730 and controller and memory 714 of field interface module 790. Further, the software modules may execute on two or more of the components concurrently in a distributed manner.


Referring now to both FIG. 7A (which includes the same software modules as FIG. 7B) and FIG. 8, transmission of an interrogation light beam is initiated and directed to a permanently deployed array of sensors 300, i.e., deployed with the intent of operating the array for the lifespan of the monitored reservoir without removal of the array (block 802; fiber-optic module 782). An EM signal induced by an EM source in the formation surrounding the monitored reservoir is received by the sealed and encapsulated sensors 300 of the array (block 804, receive module 776). In at least some illustrative embodiments, the EM source is a natural source, while in other illustrative embodiments the EM source is a controlled source (e.g. EM controlled source transmitter 736) that is commanded to turn on and off as needed by the software executing on processor 756.


One or more of the EM sensors 300 modulates the interrogation light beam as it passes through the sensor, and the modulated beam is received from the sensors (block 806; fiber-optic module 782). The EM sensor data is collected and used to produce at least two surveys that are separated in time by at least one month (block 808; inversion module 778), with the survey data being combined to produce a time-lapse earth model of the reservoir (block 810; model 780). The resulting model is then used to simulate the reservoir and predict it future behavior (block 812; model 780) with the simulation results being presented to the user (block 812; block 772), ending the method (block 814).


It should be noted that the use of optical fibers and/or TECs enable other sensor systems to be incorporated into the sensor array, providing additional concurrently collected data to be combined with the survey data produced from EM data collected from the EM sensor 300 array. For example the optical fiber can be used as a sensing device within a distributed temperature sensor system (DTSS), enabling the collection of temperature data at the location of each EM sensor 300 that can be used to temperature calibrate the data collected. Seismic sensors may also be deployed and coupled to the fiber or TEC to provide con currently collected seismic data that may also be combined with the EM sensor survey data. The combination of EM survey, temperature and seismic data enhances the resolution and accuracy of the time-lapse earth model produced. Other types of sensors and data that can be combined with the EM survey data, such as geophysical and production well data, will become apparent to those of ordinary skill in the art, and all such sensors, data and combinations are within the scope of the present disclosure.


Numerous other modifications, equivalents, and alternatives, will become apparent to those skilled in the art once the above disclosure is fully appreciated. For example although the embodiments described included a single subsea interface module coupled to a single sensor array over a single reservoir, other illustrative embodiments may include multiple subsea interface modules, each coupled to multiple arrays deployed over separate regions of a reservoir or over multiple reservoirs within a production field. It is intended that the following claims be interpreted to embrace all such modifications, equivalents, and alternatives where applicable.

Claims
  • 1. An onshore electromagnetic (EM) reservoir monitoring system that comprises: a light source that produces an interrogation light beam;an array of EM sensors positioned above ground or buried underground within an onshore production field and above one or more regions of interest within a subterranean formation, the EM sensors coupled to each other and the light source with at least one optical fiber, wherein at least one of the EM sensors modulates the interrogation light beam in response to an EM signal induced into the subterranean formation by an EM source;a processor that couples to and controls the light source, and further couples to and processes the modulated light received from the array via the at least one optical fiber, wherein said EM sensors and said processor collect EM data to produce two or more EM surveys, each EM survey based on data sets collected at different times;wherein each EM sensor is physically isolated from a surrounding environment, the EM sensor comprising two cylindrical electrodes arranged provide sensing surfaces to receive the EM signal, a cylindrical encapsulation layer arranged over the cylindrical electrodes to isolate the cylindrical electrodes from the surrounding environment, an optical transducer arranged within the cylindrical electrodes, and the optical fiber arranged within the optical transducer, wherein the optical transducer is arranged to modulate the interrogation light beam in response to the EM signal induced into the subterranean formation by the EM source; andwherein the two or more surveys are combined to produce a time-lapse earth model of the one or more regions of interest.
  • 2. The system of claim 1, wherein the data sets corresponding to at least two of the two or more EM surveys are collected at times separated by at least one month.
  • 3. The system of claim 1, wherein the cylindrical electrodes are encapsulated in fiberglass to avoid direct contact with the surrounding environment and are each capacitively coupled to the ground of the onshore production field.
  • 4. The system of claim 1, wherein the EM source comprises a controlled EM source coupled to and controlled by the processor or comprises a natural EM source.
  • 5. The system of claim 1, wherein the collected EM data is sampled continuously.
  • 6. The system of claim 1, wherein the at least one EM sensor comprises a transducer selected from the group consisting of an optical cavity transducer, a variable optical path length transducer and a microbender transducer.
  • 7. The system of claim 1, wherein the collected EM data is combined with other geophysical data or other production data to improve resolution of the time lapse earth model of the one or more regions of interest.
  • 8. The system of claim 1, wherein the at least one optical fiber is part of a distributed temperature sensor system (DTSS) and wherein temperature data from the DTSS is used to calibrate the collected EM data.
  • 9. The system of claim 1, wherein the at least one optical fiber further couples to a seismic sensing system and wherein the processor combines seismic data from the seismic sensing system with the collected EM data to improve resolution of the earth model of the one or more regions of interest.
  • 10. An onshore electromagnetic (EM) reservoir monitoring method that comprises: causing a light source to direct a beam of light through at least one optical fiber to an array of EM sensors placed above ground or buried underground within an onshore production field and above one or more regions of interest within a subterranean formation;receiving a modulated version of the beam of light, at least one of the one or more EM sensors modulating the beam of light in response to an EM signal induced within the subterranean formation by an EM source, each EM sensor being physically isolated from a surrounding environment, the EM sensor comprising two cylindrical electrodes arranged provide sensing surfaces to receive the EM signal, a cylindrical encapsulation layer arranged over the cylindrical electrodes to isolate the cylindrical electrodes from the surrounding environment, an optical transducer arranged within the cylindrical electrodes, and the optical fiber arranged within the optical transducer, wherein the optical transducer is arranged to modulate the beam of light in response to the EM signal induced into the surrounding environment by the EM source;collecting EM data based on the received modulated light beam and producing two or more EM surveys, each EM survey based on data sets collected at different time;combining the two or more surveys and producing a time-lapse earth model of the one or more regions of interest; andexecuting simulations using the time-lapse earth model to predict reservoir behavior and displaying simulation results.
  • 11. The method of claim 10, wherein the collecting of EM data for data sets corresponding to at least two of the two or more EM surveys each occurs at times separated by at least one month.
  • 12. The method of claim 10, further comprising using the cylindrical electrodes to avoid direct contact with the surrounding environment, said cylindrical electrodes being capacitively coupled to the ground of the onshore production field, wherein the cylindrical electrodes are encapsulated in fiberglass.
  • 13. The method of claim 10, wherein the EM source comprises a controlled EM source or a natural EM source.
  • 14. The method of claim 10, further comprising collecting the EM data continuously.
  • 15. The method of claim 10, wherein at least one of the one or more EM sensors comprises a transducer selected from the group consisting of an optical cavity transducer, a variable optical path length transducer and a microbender transducer.
  • 16. The method of claim 10, further comprising combining the collected EM data with other geophysical data or other production data to improve resolution of the time lapse earth model of the one or more regions of interest.
  • 17. The method of claim 10, wherein the at least one optical fiber is part of a distributed temperature sensor system (DTSS) and the method further comprising calibrating the collected EM data with temperature data from the DTSS.
  • 18. The method of claim 10, wherein the at least one optical fiber further couples to a seismic sensing system and the method further comprises combining seismic data from the seismic sensing system with the collected EM data to improve resolution of one or more reservoir models.
PCT Information
Filing Document Filing Date Country Kind
PCT/US2014/067777 11/26/2014 WO 00
Publishing Document Publishing Date Country Kind
WO2016/085511 6/2/2016 WO A
US Referenced Citations (205)
Number Name Date Kind
4090141 Leblanc May 1978 A
4222261 Leblanc et al. Sep 1980 A
4348587 Tangonan et al. Sep 1982 A
4360272 Schmadel et al. Nov 1982 A
4376248 Giallorenzi et al. Mar 1983 A
4433291 Yariv Feb 1984 A
4596442 Anderson et al. Jun 1986 A
4622460 Failes et al. Nov 1986 A
4868495 Einzig et al. Sep 1989 A
4918371 Bobb Apr 1990 A
4950883 Glenn Aug 1990 A
4973845 Mastrippolito et al. Nov 1990 A
4996419 Morey Feb 1991 A
5047741 Laskaris et al. Sep 1991 A
5275038 Sizer et al. Jan 1994 A
5294788 Charon et al. Mar 1994 A
5305075 Bucholtz et al. Apr 1994 A
5317576 Leonberger et al. May 1994 A
5471139 Zadoff Nov 1995 A
5511083 D'Amato et al. Apr 1996 A
5513913 Ball et al. May 1996 A
5563513 Tasci et al. Oct 1996 A
5642051 Babour et al. Jun 1997 A
5691999 Ball et al. Nov 1997 A
5754284 Leblanc et al. May 1998 A
5770945 Constable Jun 1998 A
5804736 Klauder et al. Sep 1998 A
5844927 Kringlebotn Dec 1998 A
6188712 Jiang et al. Feb 2001 B1
6229308 Freedman May 2001 B1
6229808 Teich et al. May 2001 B1
6271766 Didden et al. Aug 2001 B1
6289740 Posey, Jr. et al. Sep 2001 B1
6294917 Nichols Sep 2001 B1
6314056 Bunn et al. Nov 2001 B1
6325153 Harrell Dec 2001 B1
6332109 Sheard et al. Dec 2001 B1
6393363 Wilt et al. May 2002 B1
6412555 Sten-Halvorsen et al. Jul 2002 B1
6463186 Li et al. Oct 2002 B1
6534986 Nichols Mar 2003 B2
6597481 Fatehi et al. Jul 2003 B1
6630658 Bohnert et al. Oct 2003 B1
6724469 Leblanc Apr 2004 B2
6728165 Roscigno et al. Apr 2004 B1
6731114 Lagabrielle et al. May 2004 B1
6747743 Skinner et al. Jun 2004 B2
6809516 Li et al. Oct 2004 B1
6914433 Wright et al. Jul 2005 B2
6957576 Skinner et al. Oct 2005 B2
6961601 Matthews et al. Nov 2005 B2
7077200 Adnan et al. Jul 2006 B1
7109717 Constable et al. Sep 2006 B2
7151377 Chouzenoux et al. Dec 2006 B2
7183777 Bristow et al. Feb 2007 B2
7391942 Loock et al. Jun 2008 B2
7477160 Lemenager et al. Jan 2009 B2
7489134 Reiderman Feb 2009 B2
7492168 Ogilvy et al. Feb 2009 B2
7673682 Daily Mar 2010 B2
7747388 Mombourquette et al. Jun 2010 B2
8035393 Tenghamn et al. Oct 2011 B2
8058869 Cranch et al. Nov 2011 B2
8165178 Henderson et al. Apr 2012 B2
8379438 Tio Castro et al. Feb 2013 B2
8380439 Lagmanson et al. Feb 2013 B2
8437961 Srnka et al. May 2013 B2
8633700 England et al. Jan 2014 B1
8710845 Lindqvist et al. Apr 2014 B2
9008970 Donderici et al. Apr 2015 B2
9081114 Nie et al. Jul 2015 B2
9091785 Donderici et al. Jul 2015 B2
9127531 Maida et al. Sep 2015 B2
9181754 Donderici et al. Nov 2015 B2
9273548 Leblanc et al. Mar 2016 B2
9297767 Maida, Jr. et al. Mar 2016 B2
20010023614 Tubel et al. Sep 2001 A1
20020063866 Kersey et al. May 2002 A1
20030038634 Strack Feb 2003 A1
20030057950 Gao et al. Mar 2003 A1
20030094281 Tubel May 2003 A1
20030205083 Tubel et al. Nov 2003 A1
20030205375 Wright et al. Nov 2003 A1
20040006429 Brown Jan 2004 A1
20040033017 Kringlebotn et al. Feb 2004 A1
20040093950 Bohnert May 2004 A1
20040104051 Moriarty et al. Jun 2004 A1
20040117119 West et al. Jun 2004 A1
20040140091 Gupta Jul 2004 A1
20050156602 Conti Jul 2005 A1
20050206385 Strack et al. Sep 2005 A1
20060081412 Wright et al. Apr 2006 A1
20060214098 Ramos Sep 2006 A1
20060220651 Clark Oct 2006 A1
20060250274 Mombourquette et al. Nov 2006 A1
20060272809 Tubel et al. Dec 2006 A1
20070000912 Aisenbrey Jan 2007 A1
20070062696 Wilson Mar 2007 A1
20070126594 Atkinson et al. Jun 2007 A1
20070228288 Smith Oct 2007 A1
20070278008 Kuckes et al. Dec 2007 A1
20080041575 Clark et al. Feb 2008 A1
20080042636 Koste et al. Feb 2008 A1
20080053702 Smith, Jr. Mar 2008 A1
20080106265 Campbell May 2008 A1
20080123467 Ronnekleiv et al. May 2008 A1
20080210426 Lembcke et al. Sep 2008 A1
20080241964 Kaieda et al. Oct 2008 A1
20080246485 Hibbs et al. Oct 2008 A1
20080290873 Homan et al. Nov 2008 A1
20080317400 Petrov Dec 2008 A1
20090005994 Srnka et al. Jan 2009 A1
20090039888 MacGregor et al. Feb 2009 A1
20090044977 Johnson et al. Feb 2009 A1
20090071080 Bourgain et al. Mar 2009 A1
20090102474 Cranch et al. Apr 2009 A1
20090179647 Wang et al. Jul 2009 A1
20090188665 Tubel et al. Jul 2009 A1
20090199630 Difoggio et al. Aug 2009 A1
20090237084 Itskovich et al. Sep 2009 A1
20090268197 Perron et al. Oct 2009 A1
20090296755 Brown et al. Dec 2009 A1
20090308657 Clark et al. Dec 2009 A1
20100013487 Bloemenkamp Jan 2010 A1
20100046002 Perez et al. Feb 2010 A1
20100097065 Itskovich et al. Apr 2010 A1
20100118657 Trinh et al. May 2010 A1
20100134113 Depavia et al. Jun 2010 A1
20100185393 Liang et al. Jul 2010 A1
20100198519 Wilt et al. Aug 2010 A1
20100224362 Carazzone Sep 2010 A1
20100237084 Freed Sep 2010 A1
20100271030 Reiderman et al. Oct 2010 A1
20100277177 Alumbaugh et al. Nov 2010 A1
20110017512 Codazzi Jan 2011 A1
20110074428 Wang Mar 2011 A1
20110083838 Labrecque Apr 2011 A1
20110084696 Tenghamn et al. Apr 2011 A1
20110088462 Samson et al. Apr 2011 A1
20110090496 Samson et al. Apr 2011 A1
20110100632 Dinariev et al. May 2011 A1
20110139447 Ramos et al. Jun 2011 A1
20110158043 Johnstad Jun 2011 A1
20110163891 Wilson et al. Jul 2011 A1
20110170112 Gibler et al. Jul 2011 A1
20110188347 Thiercelin et al. Aug 2011 A1
20110198078 Harrigan et al. Aug 2011 A1
20110277996 Cullick et al. Nov 2011 A1
20110298461 Bittar et al. Dec 2011 A1
20110308788 Ravi et al. Dec 2011 A1
20120001625 Yamada et al. Jan 2012 A1
20120013893 Maida et al. Jan 2012 A1
20120014211 Maida, Jr. et al. Jan 2012 A1
20120020184 Wilson et al. Jan 2012 A1
20120061084 Sweatman et al. Mar 2012 A1
20120090827 Sugiura Apr 2012 A1
20120111633 Sunil May 2012 A1
20120126993 Samson et al. May 2012 A1
20120130641 Morrison et al. May 2012 A1
20120147381 Leblanc et al. Jun 2012 A1
20120147924 Hall Jun 2012 A1
20120175513 Duncan et al. Jul 2012 A1
20120191353 Wilt et al. Jul 2012 A1
20120205103 Ravi et al. Aug 2012 A1
20120212229 Sinclair et al. Aug 2012 A1
20120223717 Labrecque Sep 2012 A1
20120234605 Donderici et al. Sep 2012 A1
20120257475 Luscombe et al. Oct 2012 A1
20120293179 Colombo et al. Nov 2012 A1
20130018585 Zhdanov et al. Jan 2013 A1
20130018588 Zhdanov et al. Jan 2013 A1
20130032404 Donderici et al. Feb 2013 A1
20130033961 Burnstad Feb 2013 A1
20130056197 Maida et al. Mar 2013 A1
20130105224 Donderici et al. May 2013 A1
20130118734 Csutak et al. May 2013 A1
20130127471 Südow et al. May 2013 A1
20130141102 Donderici et al. Jun 2013 A1
20130146756 Schmidt Jun 2013 A1
20130166215 Bittar et al. Jun 2013 A1
20130169278 Bittar et al. Jul 2013 A1
20130207661 Ellingsrud et al. Aug 2013 A1
20130245947 Samsom et al. Sep 2013 A1
20130248250 Bittar et al. Sep 2013 A1
20130249705 Sharp et al. Sep 2013 A1
20130279841 Joinson Oct 2013 A1
20130293235 Bloemenkamp et al. Nov 2013 A1
20130297215 Rondeleux Nov 2013 A1
20140032116 Guner et al. Jan 2014 A1
20140036628 Hill et al. Feb 2014 A1
20140097848 Leblanc et al. Apr 2014 A1
20140111348 Skinner et al. Apr 2014 A1
20140139225 Mandviwala May 2014 A1
20140139226 Jaaskelainen et al. May 2014 A1
20140191120 Donderici et al. Jul 2014 A1
20140191761 San Martin et al. Jul 2014 A1
20140222343 Samson et al. Aug 2014 A1
20140244175 Donderici et al. Aug 2014 A1
20150137817 Wilson et al. May 2015 A1
20150160365 Donderici et al. Jun 2015 A1
20150330190 Wu et al. Nov 2015 A1
20160187525 Wilson et al. Jun 2016 A1
20160259085 Wilson et al. Sep 2016 A1
20160266269 Wilson et al. Sep 2016 A1
20170227665 Wilson Aug 2017 A1
Foreign Referenced Citations (12)
Number Date Country
1 803 001 Feb 2012 EP
2005085909 Sep 2005 WO
2005085909 Sep 2005 WO
2012100217 Jul 2012 WO
2012145583 Oct 2012 WO
2012145583 Oct 2012 WO
2012177349 Dec 2012 WO
2012177349 Dec 2012 WO
2013012967 Jan 2013 WO
2015160347 Oct 2015 WO
2015178878 Nov 2015 WO
2016085511 Jun 2016 WO
Non-Patent Literature Citations (94)
Entry
PCT International Search Report and Written Opinion, dated Aug. 12, 2015, Appl No. PCT/US2014/067777, “Onshore Electromagnetic Reservoir Monitoring,” Filed Nov. 26, 2014, 17 pgs.
Colombo, Daniele et al., “Quantifying Surface-To-Reservoir Electromagnetics for Waterflood Monitoring in a Saudi Arabian Carbonate Reservoir”, Geophysics, 78(6) E281-E297, 2013.
Hibbs, A D. et al., “Advances in Electromagnetic Survey Instrumentation and the Use of a Cased Borehole for Imaging a Deep Formations”, 76th EAGE Conference & Exhibition 2014 Amsterdam RAI, The Netherlands, Jun. 16-19, 2014, 2014, 3 pgs.
Hibbs, A. D. et al., “Capacitive Electric Field Measurements for Geophysics”, EAGE Conference and Exhibition incorporating SPE EUROPEC 2011, Vienna, Austria, Expanded Abstracts, 2011, 2 pgs.
Hibbs, Andrew et al., “New Electromagnetic Sensors for Magnetotelluric and Induced Polarization Geophysical Surveys”, SEG Annual Meeting, Expanded Abstracts, 2012, 5 pgs.
Hordt, A et al., “A First Attempt at Monitoring Underground Gas Storage by Means of Time-lapse Multichannel Transient Electromagnetics”, Geophysical Prospecting, 2000, 48, 489-509, European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers, 2000, 21 pgs.
Marsala, Alberto F. et al., “First Borehole to Surface Electromagnetic Survey in KSA: Reservoir Mapping and Monitoring at a New Scale”, SPE 146348, 2011, 9 pgs.
Marsala, Alberto F. et al., “Fluid Distribution Inter-Well Mapping in Multiple Reservoirs by Innovative Borehole to Surface Electromagnetic: Survey Design and Field Acquisition”, IPTC 17045, 2013, 4 pgs.
Marsala, Alberto F. et al., “Six-Component Tensor of the Surface Electromagnetic Field Produced by a Borehole Source Recorded by Innovative Capacitive Sensors”, Presented at SEG 83rd Annual Meeting, 2013, 5 pgs.
Schamper, Cyril et al., “4D CSEM Feasibility Study: A Land Example”, SEG Houston 2009 International Exposition and Annual Meeting, 2009, 5 pgs.
Strack, K M. et al., “Integrating Long-Offset Transient Electromagnetics (LOTEM) with Seismics in an Exploration Environment”, Geophysical Prospecting, 1996, 44, 997-7017, European Association of Geo-scientists & Engineers, 1996, 21 pgs.
Tseng, H.W. et al., “A Borehole-to-Surface Electromagnetic Survey”, Geophysics, 63(5), 1565-1572, 1998.
Wirianto, Marwan et al., “A Feasibility Study of Land CSEM Reservoir Monitoring in a Complex 3D Model”, Geophysical Journal International, Piers Online, vol. 6, No. 5, 2010, pp. 440-444.
Wright, David et al., “Hydrocarbon detection and monitoring with a multicomponent transient electromagnetic (MTEM) survey”, The Leading Edge, 21 (9), 2002, pp. 862-864.
Zhdanov, Michael S. et al., “Feasibility study of electromagnetic monitoring of CO2 sequestration in deep reservoirs”, SEG Houston 2013 Annual Meeting, DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.1190/segam2013-0694.1, 2013, pp. 2417-2421.
Canadian Application Serial No. 2,961,172; Examiner's Letter: Aug. 31, 2018, 6 pages.
Mwenifumbo, et al., “Field Evaluation of a New Borehole Resistivity Probe Using Capacitive Electrodes”, Proceedings of the Symposium on the Applications of Geophysics to Engineering and Environmental Problems, 1999, pp. 859-867.
Orange, et al., “The Feasibility of Reservoir Monitoring Using Time-Lapse Marine CSEM”, Geophysics, 74 (2), pp. F21-F29.
Panissod, et al., “Recent Developments in Shallow-Depth Electrical and Electrostatic Prospecting Using Mobile Arrays”, Geophysics, vol. 63, No. 5 (Sep.-Oct. 1998), 1998, pp. 1542-1550.
Park, et al., “CSEM sensitivity study for Sleipner CO2-injection monitoring”, Energy Procedia 37, SciVerse ScienceDirect, pp. 4199-4206.
Petia, “Second Generation of Lead-Lead Chloride Electrodes for Geophysical Applications”, Pure and Applied Geophysics, 157, 2000, pp. 357-382.
Raiche, “A Flow-Through Hankel Transform Technique for Rapid, Accurate Green's Function Computation”, Radio Science, 34 (2), 1999 pp. 549-555.
Salak0, et al., “Potential Applications of Time-lapse Marine CSEM to Reservoir Monitoring”, 75th EAGE Conference & Exhibition incorporating SPE EUROPEC, London, UK, Jun. 10-13, 2013, 5 pgs.
Schamper, et al., “4D CSEM Feasibility Study: A Land Example”, SEG Houston 2009 International Exposition and Annual Meeting, 2009, 5 pgs.
Schmidt-Hatternberger, et al., “Electrical resistivity tomography ERT) for monitoring of CO2 migration—from tool development to reservoir surveillance at the Ketzin pilot site”, Energy Procedia 37, SciVerse ScienceDirect, 2013, pp. 4268-4275.
Shima, et al., “Developments of Non-Contact Data Acquisition Techniques in Electrical and Electromagnetic Explorations”, Journal of Applied Geophysics, 35, 1996, pp. 167-173.
Shima, et al., “Fast Imaging of Shallow Resistivity Structures Using a Multichannel Capacitive Electrode System”, SEG Annual Meeting, Expanded Abstracts, pp. 377-380.
Strack, et al., “Integrating Long-Offset Transient Electromagnetics (LOTEM) with Seismics in an Exploration Environment”, Geophysical Prospecting, 1996, 44, 997-1017, European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers, 1996), 21 pgs.
Tabbagh, et al., “Determination of Electrical Properties of the Ground at Shallow Depth With an Electrostatic Quadrupole: Field Trials on Archaeological Sites”, Geophysical Prospecting, 41, (1993), pp. 579-597.
Thiel, et al., “On Measuring Electromagnetic Surface Impedance—Discussions with Professor James R. Wait”, IEEE Transactions on Antennas and Propagation, vol. 48, No. 10, (2000), pp. 1517-1520.
Timofeeev, et al., “A New Ground Resistivity Method for Engineering and Environmental Geophysics”, Proceedings of the Symposium on the Applications of Geophysics to Engineering and Environmental Problems, (1994), pp. 701-715.
Tondel, et al., “Remote Reservoir Monitoring in Oil Sands: From Feasibility Study to Baseline Datasets”, CSEG-CSPG-CWLS GeoConvention, Expanded Abstracts, (2013), 5 pgs.
Tondel, et al., “Reservoir monitoring in oil sands: Developing a permanent cross-well system”, Presented at SEG Annual Meeting, 2011, San Antonio, 5 pgs.
Tseng, et al., “A Borehole-to-Surface Electromagnetic Survey”, Geophysics, 63(5), pp. 1565-1572, (1998).
Tumanski, “Induction coil sensors—a reivew”, Institute of Physics Publishing, Measurement Science and Technology. 18 (2007) R31-R46, 2007, 17 pgs.
Vohra, et al., “Fiber-optic ac electric-field sensor based on the electrostrictive effect”, Optic Letters, vol. 17, No. 5, Mar. 1, 1992, Mar. 1, 1992, 3 pgs.
Wilt, et al., “Crosswell Electromagnetic Tomography: System Design Considerations and Field Results”, Geophysics, vol. 60, No. 3 (May-Jun. 1995), pp. 871-855.
Wirianto, et al., “A Feasibility Study of Land CSEM Reservoir Monitoring in a Complex 3D Model”, Geophysical Journal International, Piers Online, vol. 6, No. 5, (2010), pp. 440-444.
Wright, et al., “Hydrocarbon detection and monitoring with a multicomponent transient electromagnetic (MTEM) survey”, The Leading Edge, 21 (9), 2002, 7 pages.
Yang, et al., “Optical fiber magnetic field sensors with TbDyFe magnetostrictive thin films as sensing materials”, National Engineering Laboratory for Optical Fiber Sensors, 2009, Optical Society of America, (2009), 6 pgs.
Zach, et al., “Marine CSEM Time-Lapse Repeatability for Hydrocarbon Field Monitoring”, Presented at SEG Annual Meeting in Houston, (2009), 5 pgs.
Zhdanov, et al., “3D inversion of towed streamer EM data—A model study of the Harding field and comparison to 3D CSEM inversion”, SEG San Antonio 2011 Annual Meeting, (2011), 5 pgs.
Zhdanov, et al., “Feasibility study of electromagnetic monitoring of CO2 sequestration in deep reservoirs”, SEG Houston 2013 Annual Meeting, DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.0090/segam2013-0694.1, 2013, pp. 2417-2421.
Ziolkowski, et al., “Multi-Transient Electromagnetic Repeatability Experiment Over the North Sea Harding Field”, Geophysical Prospecting, 58, (2010), pp. 1159-1176.
Zonge, et al., “The Effect of Electrode Contact Resistance on Electric Field Measurements”, 55th SEG Annual Meeting, Washington D.C., Expanded Abstracts, (1985), 8 pgs.
Australian Patent App. No. 2014384700, Examination Report, dated Sep. 14, 2016, 3 pgs.
PCT Application No. PCT/US2013/075117, International Preliminary Report on Patentability, dated Jun. 23, 2016, 9 pgs.
PCT Application No. PCT/US2013/075117, International Search Report & Written Opinion, dated Sep. 12, 2014, 12 pgs.
PCT Application No. PCT/US2014/019228, International Preliminary Report on Patentability, dated Sep. 15, 2016, 10 pgs.
PCT Application No. PCT/US2014/019228, International Search Report & Written Opinion, dated Nov. 5, 2014, 12 pgs.
PCT Application No. PCT/US2014/034416, International Preliminary Report on Patentability, dated Oct. 18, 2016, 10 pgs.
PCT Application No. PCT/US2014/034416, International Search Report & Written Opinion, dated Jan. 19, 2015, 13 pgs.
PCT Application No. PCT/US2014/038552, International Preliminary Report on Patentability, dated Nov. 22, 2016, 11 pgs.
PCT Application No. PCT/US2014/038552, International Search Report & Written Opinion, dated Feb. 17, 2015, 13 pgs.
PCT Application No. PCT/US2014/067774, International Search Report & Written Opinion, dated Aug. 11, 2015, 15 pgs.
PCT Application No. PCT/US2014/067777, International Search Report & Written Opinion, dated Aug. 12, 2015, 15 pgs.
PCT Application No. PCT/US2015/063755, International Search Report & Written Opinion, dated Aug. 16, 2016, 12 pgs.
U.S. Final Office Action, dated Dec. 13, 2016, U.S. Appl. No. 14/760,718, “Time-Lapse Electromagnetic Monitoring,” filed Jul. 14, 2015, 27 pgs.
Andreis, et al., “Using CSEM to Monitor Production From a Complex 3D Gas Reservoir—A Synthetic Case Study”, The Leading Edge, 30 (11), Sep. 2011, pp. 1070-1079.
Bergmann, et al., “Surface-downhole electrical resistivity tomography applied to monitoring of CO2 storage at Ketzin, Germany”, Geophysics, vol. 77, No. 6, Nov.-Dec. 2012, pp. B253-B267.
Berre, et al., “Identification of three-dimensional electric conductivity changes from time-lapse electromagnetic observations”, Journal of Computational Physics, 23, (2011), pp. 3915-3928.
Bhuyian, et al., “3D CSEM modeling and time-lapse sensitivity analysis for subsurface CO2 storage”, Geophysics 77 (5), (2012), pp. E343-E355.
Black, et al., “3D inversion of time-lapse CSEM data based on dynamic reservoir simulations of the Harding field, North Sea”, 2011 SEG San Antonio 2011 Annual Meeting, pp. 666-667.
Black, et al., “3D inversion of time-lapse CSEM data for reservoir surveillance”, SEG Denver 2010 Annual Meeting 716, (2010), 5 pgs.
Black, et al., “Monitoring of hydrocarbon reservoirs using marine CSEM method”, SEG Houston 2009 International Exposition and Annual Meeting, (2009) 5 pgs.
Bristow, et al., “A New Temperature Capacitive-Resistivity, and Magnetic-Susceptibility Borehole Probe for Mineral Exploration, Groundwater, and Environmental Applications”, GeologicalSurvey of Canada, Technical Note No. 3, doi: 10.4095/289197, 2011, 12 pgs.
Carrigan, et al., “Electrical resistance tomographic monitoring of CO2 movement in deep geologic reservoirs”, International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, doi: 10.1016/j.ijggc.2013.04.016, (2013), pp. 401-408.
Christensen, et al., “Monitoring CO2 injection with cross-hole electrical resistivity tomography”, Exploration Geophysics, Butsuri-Tansa (vol. 59, No. 1), Mulli-Tamsa (vol. 9, No. 1), 2005, pp. 44-49.
Chuprin, et al., “Quantifying factors affecting repeatability in CSEM surveying for reservoir appraisal and monitoring”, SEG Las Vegas 2008 Annual Meeting, 2008, pp. 648-652.
Colombo, “Quantifying Surface-to-Reservoir Electromagnetics for Waterflood Monitoring in a Saudi Arabian Carbonate Reservoir”, Geophysics, 78(6) E281-E297, (2013).
Deceuster, et al., “Automated Identification of Changes in Electrode Contact Properties for Long Term Permanent ERT Monitoring Experiments”, Geophysics, vol. 78, No. 2 (Mar.-Apr. 2013), 2011, pp. E79-E94.
Douma, et al., “A Capacitive-Coupled Ground Resistivity System for Engineering and Environmental Applications: Results of Two Canadian Field Tests”, SEG Annual Meeting, Expanded Abstracts, 1994, pp. 559-561.
Grard, et al., “A Mobile Four-Electrode Array and Its Application to the Electrical Survey of Planetary Grounds at Shallow Depths”, Journal of Geophysical Research, vol. 96, No. B3, Mar. 10, 1991, pp. 4117-4123.
Habashy, et al., “Beyond the Born and Rytov Approximations: A Nonlinear Approach to Electromagnetic Scattering”, Journal of Geophysical Research, vol. 98, No. B2, pp. 1759-1775, Feb. 10, 1993.
Haber, et al., “Enhanced Reservoir Monitoring using Coupled Electromagnetics and Flow Modeling”, Computational Geosciences Inc., Presented at ASEG 23rd International Conference and Exhibition, Melbourne, Australia, 1 pg.
Hibbs, et al., “Advances in Electromagnetic Survey Instrumentation and the Use of a Cased Borehole for Imaging a Deep Formations”, 76th EAGE Conference &Exhibition 2014 Amsterdam RAI, The NetherlandsJun. 16-19, 2014, (2014), 3 pgs.
Hibbs, et al., “Capacitive Electric Field Measurements for Geophysics”, EAGE Conference and Exhibition incorporating SPE EUROPEC 2011, Vienna, Austria, Expanded Abstracts, 2011, 2 pgs.
Hibbs, et al., “New Electromagnetic Sensors for Magnetotelluric and Induce Polarization Geophysical Surveys”, SEG Annual Meeting, Expanded Abstracts, 2012, 5 pgs.
Holten, et al., “Time lapse CSEM measurements for reservoir monitoring using a vertical receiver-transmitter setup”, 2011 SEG San Antonio 2011 Annual Meeting, (2011), pp. 697-701.
Hordt, et al., “A First Attempt at Monitoring Underground Gas Storage by Means of Time-lapse Multichannel Transient Electromagnetics”, Geophysical Prospecting, 2000, 48, 489-509, European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers, (2000), 21 pgs.
Hoversten, et al., “Crosswell Electromagnetic and Seismic Imaging: An Examination of Coincident Surveys at a Steam Flood Project”, Geophysics, 69 (2), (2004), pp. 406-414.
Kang, et al., “A Feasibility Study of CO2 Sequestration Monitoring Using the MCSEM Method at a Deep Brine Aquifer in a Shallow Sea”, Geophysics 77 (20, 2012, pp. E117-E126.
Kiessling, et al., “Geoelectrical Methods for Monitoring Geological CO2 Storage; First Results From Cross-Hole and Surface-Downhole Measurements From the CO2Sink Test Site at Ketzin (Germany)”, International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 4, 2010, pp. 816-826.
Kuras, et al., “Capacitive Resistivity Imaging With Towed Arrays”, Journal of Engineering and Environmental Geophysics, vol. 12, Issue 3, 2007, pp. 267-279.
Kuras, et al., “Fundamentals of the Capacitive Resistivity Technique”, Geophysics, vol. 71, No. 3 (May-Jun. 2006), 2006, pp. G135-G152.
Labrecque, et al., “Assessment of Measurement Errors for Galvanic-Resistivity Electrodes of Different Composition”, Geophysics, vol. 73, No. 2 (Mar.-Apr. 2008), 2008, pp. F55-F64.
Liang, et al., “Joint Inversion of Controlled-Source Electromagnetic and Production Data for Reservoir Monitoring”, Geophysics 77 (5), pp. ID9-ID22.
Lien, et al., “Sensitivity Study of Marine CSEM Data for Reservoir Production Monitoring”, Geophysics, 73 (4), 2008, pp. F151-F163.
Maas, et al., “A Fibre Optic Multi-Component Seismic Acquisition System for Permanent Reservoir Monitoring”, Presented at 2008 SPE Asia Pacific Oil and Gas Conference, SPE 115185, (2008), 7 pgs.
Macnae, “Electric Field Measurements in Air”, SEG Annual Meeting, Expanded Abstracts, 2010, pp. 1773-1777.
Marsala, et al., “First Borehole to Surface Electromagnetic Survey in KSA: Reservoir Mapping and Monitoring at a New Scale”, SPE 146348, (2011), 9 pgs.
Marsala, et al., “Fluid Distribution Inter-Well Mapping in Multiple Reservoirs by Innovative Borehole to Surface Electromagnetic: Survey Design and Field Acquisition”, IPTC 17045, (2013), 4 pgs.
Marsala, et al., “Six-Component Tensor of the Surface Electromagnetic Field Produced by a Borehole Source Recorded by Innovative Capacitive Sensors”, Presented at SEG 83rd Annual Meeting, (2013), 5 pgs.
Mwenifumbo, et al., “Capacitive Conductivity Logging and Electrical Stratigraphy in a High-Resistivity Aquifer, Boise Hydrogeophysical Research Site”, Geophysics, vol. 74, No. 3 (May-Jun. 2009), 2009, pp. E125-E133.
Related Publications (1)
Number Date Country
20170322333 A1 Nov 2017 US