Inversion study of a large marine CSEM survey

Carazzone, James J.; Dickens, Thomas A.; Green, K.E.; Jing, Charlie; Willen, Dennis E.; Wahrmund, L.A.; Newman, Gregory A.; Commer, Michael

doi:10.1190/1.3063733

Cited by 15 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Given the great computational cost of 3D inversion, the fact that most marine CSEM data are collected as individual lines of radialcomponent data ͑or a small number of parallel or intersecting lines͒, and the observation that 2D inversion has become an effective workhorse for MT interpretation even as 3D inversion has become tractable, one could ask what the relative gains of 3D inversion might be. Certainly, a few spectacular examples of 3D CSEM inversion have been shown at meetings ͑e.g., Carazzone et al, 2008;Price et al, 2008͒, and eventually appropriate comparisons of 2D and 3D inversions of synthetic and real data will be carried out and published. Meanwhile, we can examine the morphology of the resolution kernels for marine CSEM to get some understanding of this issue.…”

Section: Modelingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ten years of marine CSEM for hydrocarbon exploration

2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Marine controlled-source electromagnetic ͑CSEM͒ surveying has been in commercial use for predrill reservoir appraisal and hydrocarbon exploration for 10 years. Although a recent decrease has occurred in the number of surveys and publications associated with this technique, the method has become firmly established as an important geophysical tool in the offshore environment. This is a consequence of two important aspects associated with the physics of the method: First, it is sensitive to high electrical resistivity, which, although not an unambiguous indicator of hydrocarbons, is an important property of economically viable reservoirs. Second, although the method lacks the resolution of seismic wave propagation, it has a much better intrinsic resolution than potential-field methods such as gravity and magnetic surveying, which until now have been the primary nonseismic data sets used in offshore exploration. Although by many measures marine CSEM is still in its infancy, the reliability and noise floors of the instrument systems have improved significantly over the last decade, and interpretation methodology has progressed from simple anomaly detection to 3D anisotropic inversion of multicomponent data using some of the world's fastest supercomputers. Research directions presently include tackling the airwave problem in shallow water by applying time-domain methodology, continuous profiling tools, and the use of CSEM for reservoir monitoring during production.

show abstract

Section: Modelingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ten years of marine CSEM for hydrocarbon exploration

2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Marine CSEM has become a method for 3D imaging of areas with complex geologies, which is applied by many major oil companies, either as a stand-alone frontier exploration tool (Monk et al, 2008;Suffert et al, 2008) or in conjunction with, or addition to other geophysical probes. Recent published case studies for the latter include Carrazone et al (2008), Price et al (2008) Plessix and van der Sman (2008), , and .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploration case studies in mature Gulf of Mexico basins using 3D marine CSEM

Yuan

Pham

Zach

et al. 2009

SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

High salt concentrations and small targets in complicated geology often found in the Gulf of Mexico have been an impediment to the application of marine CSEM techniques, until recent advances in operations, acquisition hardware and advanced processing techniques permit 3D-mapping of complex resistivity distributions. Using two examples from a recent prelease sale campaign, we demonstrate the successful application of the entire value chain from customized acquisition grids, multi-frequency acquisition to processing of data including wide-azimuth lines with reliable phase and amplitude, and subsequent inversion-based 3D interpretation. Advanced interpretation is based on an iterative Hessian-based inversion with quasi-Newton update and fast finitedifference time-domain modeling. Inversion results are used to construct resistivity distribution consistent with 3D-seismic images. During the campaign, we successfully addressed the client's need to resolve small targets (2 km x 2 km) with low-resistivity pay (Δρ < 5 Ωm), many found in the vicinity (<1 km) of large salt bodies.

show abstract

Interpretations and Modeling

Sainson¹

2017

Electromagnetic Seabed Logging

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Inversion study of a large marine CSEM survey

Cited by 15 publications

References 1 publication

Ten years of marine CSEM for hydrocarbon exploration

Ten years of marine CSEM for hydrocarbon exploration

Exploration case studies in mature Gulf of Mexico basins using 3D marine CSEM

Interpretations and Modeling

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About