DOE OSTI2018
The Energy & Environmental Research Center (EERC) conducted a feasibility study of a new, low-impact geophysics monitoring method designed to incrementally track the saturation front of CO 2 injected into a reservoir. The method leverages a new way of transmitting energy from the surface to the reservoir and employs a new subsurface signal called the Krauklis wave (K-wave) and other guided waves for seismic monitoring. The EERC partnered with Seismos, Inc., the company that holds the exclusive technology license for this method, to advance development of K-wave technology, and Denbury Onshore, LLC, to field-test the system. The system was field-tested at Denbury’s Bell Creek oil field, currently undergoing CO 2 -based enhanced oil recovery (EOR) in southeastern Montana. The K-wave system uses a wellhead-mounted source to propagate energy down the wellbore in the form of a tube wave and through the well perforations into the reservoir. Part of the energy transmitted through the perforations into the reservoir converts to slow moving K-waves and/or other guided waves that are expected to propagate through the formation to neighboring wells. The propagated signal would induce tube waves in the neighboring wells that return to the surface to be recorded with a wellhead-mounted receiver. The propagation time of the signal is directly affected by the presence of CO 2 between the wells, so the difference in transit time of the returning signal between pre- and postinjection data sets could be used to help define the lateral extent of a CO 2 saturation front. Objectives of the study were to demonstrate, validate, and evaluate the K-wave method’s ability to monitor the morphology of injected CO 2 and estimate saturation distribution. Results from the demonstration were to be compared to conventional 4-D surface seismic methods, dynamic reservoir simulations, and CO 2 breakthrough data to validate the technology and provide useful information that may result in improvements. Prior to mobilizing for the full-scale K-wave baseline survey, a field test was conducted to better understand wellhead hardware configurations and test the response from the Bell Creek reservoir using three wells. Useful operational information resulted but signal from the first-generation gas release/gas injection source was not recorded in neighboring wells. After the initial field test, numerical modeling of the K-wave method was initiated using parameters specific to the Bell Creek Field. Modeling results indicated that the fundamental concepts behind the K-wave method exhibited problems and revealed a significantly greater attenuation of the signal at the wellbore perforations than expected, totaling on the order of 10-8 from source well to receiver well over a 400-m well spacing. Modeling also showed that greater source frequency bandwidth was needed to produce guided waves within a 30-foot-thick reservoir layer such as that at Bell Creek and that reservoir layer seismic velocity would need to be slower than the velocities of the bounding layers in order to act as a wave guide opposite to what exists at Bell Creek. Modeling results prompted a second field test with a stronger, second-generation displacement source developed in the interim. Concurrent with the second field test, a 3-D seismic survey was acquired to serve as a baseline for project validation and to serve as a monitor data set for the portion of the project area where CO 2 injection had already commenced. The new source was tested using a four-well geometry and failed to produce a detectable signal, which appeared to confirm modeling results and indicated that the Bell Creek Field is not an ideal site for the K-wave test. It was concluded that a source with sufficient strength and bandwidth could not be built to overcome the factors discovered by the modeling within a reasonable amount of time. Several other sites undergoing CO 2 -based EOR were also evaluated; however, none of these sites was amenable because of geology, limitations of source and receiver hardware, or the advanced state of the CO 2 flood. In addition, two other configurations of the source and receiver layout were considered; however, these design modifications either changed the scope of the project or did not meet the goals of the Carbon Storage Program. In consultation with the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Project Manager and Technology Manager, a no-go decision was invoked to forego additional expenditures as the technology would not meet current project objectives. Project activities to date have moved the technology forward by developing modeling equations that can be applied elsewhere, advanced the state of wellhead sensors and sources, and spurred improvements to field operations. The 3-D seismic survey in the project area and the dynamic reservoir simulations done as part of this study have provided value for ongoing and future synergistic activities at Bell Creek related to DOE carbon storage goals.
54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗