2005
DOI: 10.1190/1.2149638
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Sensitivity of time-lapse seismic data to pore pressure changes: Is quantification possible?

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

0
9
0

Year Published

2006
2006
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 19 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
9
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Indeed, |C f luid P | is estimated to be fairly small in magnitude when compared to the saturation term C S for a range of oils and it is proposed that this may be valid as a generality. However, it should be acknowledged that C rock P carries a high uncertainty (MacBeth 2004;Eiken and Tøndel 2005) and correct numerical assignment of this term depends on a range of factors that may enhance or diminish the stress sensitiv- ity relative to the calibration offered by laboratory core plug measurements (Appendix B). The current prevailing opinion is that laboratory measurements over-predict rock frame stress sensitivity.…”
Section: Numerical Examplementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Indeed, |C f luid P | is estimated to be fairly small in magnitude when compared to the saturation term C S for a range of oils and it is proposed that this may be valid as a generality. However, it should be acknowledged that C rock P carries a high uncertainty (MacBeth 2004;Eiken and Tøndel 2005) and correct numerical assignment of this term depends on a range of factors that may enhance or diminish the stress sensitiv- ity relative to the calibration offered by laboratory core plug measurements (Appendix B). The current prevailing opinion is that laboratory measurements over-predict rock frame stress sensitivity.…”
Section: Numerical Examplementioning
confidence: 99%
“…; Khatiwada et al . ; Mikhaltsevitch, Lebedev, and Gurevich ), pressure (Eiken and Tøndel ; Tura and Lumley ; Grude, Landrø, and Osdal ), or both (Landrø ; Grude et al . ).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In most cases, observed time-lapse seismic signatures are associated with reservoir compaction of poorly consolidated rocks (Landrø and Stammeijer 2004;Hatchell and Bourne 2006) and changes in fluid saturation (Wang et al 2000;Daley et al 2008;Khatiwada et al 2012;Mikhaltsevitch, Lebedev, and Gurevich 2014), pressure (Eiken and Tøndel 2005;Tura and Lumley 1998;Grude, Landrø, and Osdal 2013), or both (Landrø 2001;Grude et al 2013). A recent study in Ketzin (Germany) has shown that timelapse seismic changes could be attributed to fluid saturation, pressure change, and mineral dissolution of the rock in a sandstone reservoir (Ivandic et al 2015).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…2006). It has also long been acknowledged that pore pressure changes can have a significant impact on the seismic response (Eiken and Tøndel 2005; Hatchell and Bourne 2005; Tura et al 2005). Such pore pressure changes can influence seismic properties both within the reservoir and in the surrounding formations.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Historically, focus was on the most easily recognizable effects, such as steam injection (Eastwood et al 1994;Lumley 1995) or straight fluid replacement, observed for example at the Gullfaks and Heidrun fields * E-mail: akafu@statoilhydro.com (Landrø et al 1999;Furre et al 2006). It has also long been acknowledged that pore pressure changes can have a significant impact on the seismic response (Eiken and Tøndel 2005;Hatchell and Bourne 2005;Tura et al 2005). Such pore pressure changes can influence seismic properties both within the reservoir and in the surrounding formations.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%