CONTROL SOURCE ELECTROMAGNETIC METHODS (CSEM) IN HYDROCARBON EXPLORATION AND RESERVOIR MONITORING

SUBMITTED BY

OLAPO, OLUWABUKUNYI TOMISIN MATRIC NO- 060808074

SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF GEOSCIENCES (LECTURER: PROF. E.A. AYOLABI) IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT FOR THE AWARD OF MASTERS IN APPLIED GEOPHYSICS (EXPLORATION)

AUGUST 2012

CSEM Methods in Hydrocarbon Exploration and Reservoir Monitoring

Page 1

MARINE CONTROLLED SOURCE ELECTROMAGNETIC METHOD (CSEM) FOR HYDROCARBON EXPLORATION.

INTRODUCTION: The past 10 years have seen the birth of a new exploration method: Sea Bed Logging, a special application of marine Controlled Source ElectroMagnetic sounding (CSEM) used for direct hydrocarbon identification. The initial commercial version of SBL was introduced by the Norwegian oil company, Statoil, and was later span off to support the exploration market. For simplicity we use the phrase CSEM throughout the rest of this abstract instead of SBL. Presently the market is $200 Million USD. More than 400 surveys have been run in water depths ranging from 48 to 3392 meter and several discoveries have been reported (Smit,et al., 2006, Mittet et al., 2008). There is a total of 5 6 vessels operating around the globe today. New vessels also focusing on appraisal applications are planned. METHODOLOGY: The method is based on hydrocarbons being more resistive compared to the conductive surrounding sediments, normally consisting of brine saturated rocks such as shale. A powerful electric dipole source is towed close to the sea floor and the transmitted energy propagates down through the subsurface. When the energy enters a hydrocarbon saturated reservoir the energy flows along the reservoir (can be described as a guided wave (Eidesmo et al. 2002) described by the Poyting vector (Weidelt, 2007)) due to the resistivity contrast between the reservoir and the conductive surroundings. Energy propagates back to the seafloor and signals are recorded by seafloor receivers. The recorded data contains information that can be used to distinguish between hydrocarbon and brine saturated formations and therefore increase the success rate when exploring for hydrocarbons. CSEM is therefore established as an important exploration tool (Ellingsrud et al., 2002, Srnka et al., 2006).

CSEM Methods in Hydrocarbon Exploration and Reservoir Monitoring

Page 2

THE CHALLENGES OF CSEM The current challenge associated with CSEM technology is to correctly handle the acquired data. The electromagnetic (EM) response recorded by the receivers must be decomposed into its components, and the appropriate energy levels must be attributed to each contributing factor. This process is well known in the seismic industry. However, the higher level of complexity that governs the propagation of the electromagnetic field through the subsurface forces us to think more creatively. One way around the problem is an integrated approach where geological a priori information is incorporated into an iterative interpretation process. This approach, which has been applied to the current case study, allows fast processing of data up to the level of full 3-D inversion and migration. Through a structured and iterative interpretation process, appropriate values for each individual contributing factor can be obtained. As a result, the complexity of the problem is reduced. THE LUVA CHALLENGE In 2003, a CSEM survey was acquired to test the EM response from the Luva gas discovery, which was made by BP in the Norwegian Sea in 1997. This survey was one of many 2-D datasets that the Norwegian company EMGS acquired in the early phase of developing the CSEM method. The purpose of acquiring the data was to test the technology on proven discoveries in a multitude of geological settings. While most of these lines proved that the technology worked, there was no significant EM anomaly detected over the Luva reservoir. This was quite disappointing because it implied that the CSEM technology appeared to be unreliable. The authors re-examined the Luva data to try to understand the EM response. An investigation of the acquired CSEM data determined that the quality of the Luva dataset was good. As part of the integrated analysis approach, the reservoir section was studied in detail. Although the reservoir is considered to be of generally high quality, the resistivity log shows significant resistivity anisotropy. The calculated effective resistivity that contributes to an EM anomaly for
CSEM Methods in Hydrocarbon Exploration and Reservoir Monitoring Page 3

the reservoir interval is less than 20 ohm, while the surrounding rocks have resistivities varying between one and seven ohm. Synthetic EM modeling based on a realistic target and background geology demonstrates that the response contrast from the Luva discovery, when compared to background resistivity, will be less than 10%. It becomes apparent that the Luva target is hard to detect mainly due to the low effective resistivity of the discovery, which results in low resistivity contrasts between the reservoir and the overlying shales. In order to solve the Luva case, the ability to handle lowresistivity contrasts in the processing is crucial. This required an advanced integrated approach.

SOLVING THE CHALLENGE The starting point for further analyses involved building a representative 3-D model based on seismic data and a sound geological understanding of the area. Seismic data were particularly important at this stage as they enabled resistivity values to be attributed to particular intervals. A synthetic 3-D CSEM dataset was then generated and inverted. As a starting point for the inversion, no constraints were used. The results clearly indicate that the Luva hydrocarbon column cannot be expected to be detected using this basic approach (Figure 2, upper section). The next step was to do a similar inversion with real data as input. The inversion result is very similar to that of the synthetic data, indicating that the geological model is representative of the real geology and further demonstrating that the Luva discovery cannot be identified using this approach (Figure 2, lower section). The next step in the analysis was to provide regional constraints (but absolutely no target constraints) based on a sound geological understanding of the area. Seismic data were particularly important at this stage as they enabled resistivity values to be attributed to particular intervals. We deliberately chose not to use the well data from Luva to create the constraints because prior to discovery such data would not have been available. In order to most accurately replicate an exploration scenario, the well data should be ignored. By using regional constraints to the modeled data, the inversion was guided towards what the geoscientist considers to be a more appropriate solution. Applying this integrated approach to the synthetic model data indicated that, providing the geological model used was representative of the real geology, the Luva discovery could be identified using this workflow (Figure 3, upper section).

CSEM Methods in Hydrocarbon Exploration and Reservoir Monitoring

Page 4

Next, the same constrained approach that was applied to the synthetic model was used, but this time with real data. Again, the inputs to the constraints were taken from regional interpretation of seismic data and a sound geological understanding of the area. No well information was used, and no constraints were used for the target itself (including parameters such as geometry, depth, thickness, lateral extent and resistivity). The final result shows that the Luva discovery is clearly identified with a pronounced resistivity anomaly (Figure 3, lower section). The similarities to the synthetic example suggest that the synthetic model is realistic and consistent with observations from real data.

CONTROLLED SOURCE ELECTROMAGNETIC DATA FOR PRODUCTION MONITORING

Monitoring of reservoir production is a potential new application for Controlled Source Electromagnetics (CSEM). During water-assisted production, the water zone within the reservoir will gradually evolve with time, and accurate descriptions of its development would be very valuable for designing good production strategies. We present a sensitivity study on a model reservoir of CSEM model output wrt. changes in the electric conductivity distribution small enough to be relevant for reservoir monitoring. Issues related to instrumentation, data errors, modelling errors, and characteristic physical quantities for the reservoir, are considered. Marine controlled source electromagnetic (CSEM) data have been applied for characterisation of the oceanic lithosphere for several decades. In Eidesmo et al. (2002) and Ellingsrud et al. (2002) CSEM were applied for detection of hydrocarbon reservoirs in deep water areas. Since then, use of CSEM for exploration purposes has received increasing attention. A potential new application for CSEM is monitoring of hydrocarbon reservoirs. During water-assisted production, the zone saturated with saline water will gradually evolve, and accurate descriptions of its development would be valuable to avoid unwanted events, such as early water breakthrough, and to design good production strategies in general. An electromagnetic signal is not nearly as much influenced by the pore pressure as a seismic signal, but it is strongly influenced by the fluid content due to the large differences in the electric conductivities/ resistivities of water and hydrocarbons. (Hydrocarbon saturated reservoir rocks have resistivity values in the range [30 500] Wm, while the corresponding range for rocks saturated with saline formation water is [0.52] Wm) To be able to reach potential targets (reservoirs) with the electromagnetic energy, it is customary within exploration to apply very low frequencies (within a decade of 0.1 Hz), corresponding to long wavelengths (order of kilometers). This implies that it might be difficult to obtain a high resolution when inverting for
CSEM Methods in Hydrocarbon Exploration and Reservoir Monitoring Page 5

the electric conductivity. In comparison with exploration, monitoring of the flooding front is even more challenging wrt. resolution, as it aims to identify changes in the structure of the conductivity distribution during flooding. It is therefore important to investigate into the resolution obtainable from 4-D electromagnetic dataaloneand as a supplement to other data sources like 4-D seismic. As a first step in this direction; since the corresponding signals are expected to be fairly weak, it is important to assess the ability of the signals to overcome realistic noise. The monitoring process does, however, offer some potential advantages compared to exploration. Firstly, the existence and location of the reservoir are already established prior to the monitoring. The identification can therefore be based on a reasonably good initial reservoir description, both in terms of the conductivity distribution and the reservoir location. Secondly, the main cost of CSEM instrumentation is associated with the initial implementation of new equipment for a given target. Continuous monitoring of a fixed target, yields good value for these investments, as the same equipment can be applied for successive acquisition over a wide time horizon

CSEM Methods in Hydrocarbon Exploration and Reservoir Monitoring

Page 6