journal article·2024-02-06Open access

Petrophysical Property Prediction from Seismic Inversion Attributes Using Rock Physics and Machine Learning: Volve Field, North Sea

Doyin Pelemo-Daniels, Robert R. Stewart

Applied Sciences· Volume 14· Issue 4

Abstract

An accurate petrophysical model of the subsurface is essential for resource development and CO2 sequestration. We present a new workflow that provides a high-resolution estimate of petrophysical reservoir properties using seismic data with rock physics modeling and machine-learning techniques (i.e., deep learning neural networks). First, we compare the sequential prediction of the following petrophysical attributes: mineralogy, porosity, and fluid saturation, with the simultaneous prediction of all of the properties using the Volve field in the Norwegian North Sea as an example. The workflow shows that the sequential prediction produces a more efficient and accurate classification of petrophysical properties (the RMS error between the predicted and the original seismic trace is 50% smaller for the sequential compared to the simultaneous procedure). Next, the seismic amplitude response of the reservoirs was studied using rock physics modeling and amplitude versus offset (AVO) analysis to distinguish the different lithologies and fluid types. To ascertain the optimal hydrocarbon production areas, we performed Bayesian seismic inversion and applied machine learning to estimate the petrophysical properties. We examined how porosity, Vclay, and fluid variations affect the elastic properties. In Poisson’s ratio versus the P-wave impedance domain, a 10% porosity increase decreases the acoustic impedance (AI) by 30%, while a 20% Vclay decrease increases the AI by 12%. The Utsira Formation in the Volve field (5 km north of the Sleipner Øst field) was evaluated as a potential CO2 geological storage unit using Gassmann fluid substitution and seismic modeling. We look to assess the elastic property variation caused by CO2 saturation changes for monitoring purposes and simulate the effect. In the first 10% CO2 substitution, the P-wave velocity decrease is 12%, a subtle effect is observed for higher CO2 saturation values, and S-wave velocity (Vs) increases with CO2 saturation. Our analysis aspires to assist future reservoir studies and CO2 sequestration in similar fields.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Seismic Imaging and Inversion Techniques · Hydrocarbon exploration and reservoir analysis · Hydraulic Fracturing and Reservoir Analysis

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, University of Houston, Science and Research Building 1, 3507 Cullen Blvd, Room 312, Houston, TX 77204-5007, USA

Funding

Subsea Systems Institute · Allied Geophysics Laboratory (AGL) at the University of Houston

References (55)

Show source-provided references
1. Anees, M. (2013, January 23–25). Seismic Attribute Analysis for Reservoir Characterization. Proceedings of the 10th Biennial International Conference and Exposition, Kochi, India.
2. Joint seismic and Petrophysical nonlinear inversion with gaussian mixture-based adaptive regularization10.1190/geo2021-0017.1 ↗
3. Seismic inversion combining rock physics and multiple-point geostatistics10.1190/1.2803748 ↗
4. Sen, M.K., and Stoffa, P.L. (2013). Global Optimization Methods in Geophysical Inversion, Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511997570 ↗
5. Dvorkin, J., Grana, D., and Gutierrez, M.A. (2014). Seismic Reflections of Rock Properties, Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511843655 ↗
6. Schuster, G.T. (2017). Seismic Inversion, Society of Exploration Geophysicists.10.1190/1.9781560803423 ↗
7. Sokolov, A., Schulte, B., Shalaby, H., and Molen, M. (2021). Applied Techniques to Integrated Oil and Gas Reservoir Characterization, Elsevier.
8. Amaro, C., Grana, D., Azevedo, L., and Soares, A. (June, January 30). Geostatistical Seismic Inversion Integrating Rock Physics Models. Proceedings of the 78th EAGE Conference and Exhibition 2016, Vienna, Austria.10.3997/2214-4609.201601020 ↗
9. Chopra, S., and Marfurt, K.J. (2007). Seismic Attributes for Prospect Identification and Reservoir Characterization, Society for Exploration Geophysicists.10.1190/1.9781560801900 ↗
10. Garia, S., Pal, A.K., Ravi, K., and Nair, A.M. (2021, January 19–20). Prediction of petrophysical properties from seismic inversion and Neural Network: A case study. Proceedings of the EGU General Assembly Conference 2021, Online. Available online: https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/link_gateway/2021EGUGA..2311824G/doi:10.5194/egusphere-egu21-11824.10.5194/egusphere-egu21-11824 ↗
11. Data Mining and machine learning for porosity, saturation, and shear velocity prediction: Recent experience and results10.3997/1365-2397.fb2021055 ↗
12. Evaluation of machine learning methods for lithology classification using geophysical data10.1016/j.cageo.2020.104475 ↗
13. Hou, M., Xiao, Y., Lei, Z., Yang, Z., Lou, Y., and Liu, Y. (2023). Machine Learning Algorithms for Lithofacies Classification of the Gulong Shale from the Songliao Basin, China. Energies, 16.10.3390/en16062581 ↗
14. Seismic horizon tracking using a deep convolutional neural network10.1016/j.petrol.2019.106709 ↗
15. Unsupervised machine learning and multi-seismic attributes for fault and fracture network interpretation in the Kerry Field, Taranaki Basin, New Zealand10.1007/s40948-023-00646-9 ↗
16. Seismic stratigraphy interpretation by deep convolutional neural networks: A semisupervised workflow10.1190/geo2019-0433.1 ↗
17. Tensorflow (2021, December 20). Module: TF: Tensorflow Core v2.8.0. TensorFlow. Available online: https://www.tensorflow.org/api_docs/python/tf.
18. A comparison of standard inversion, neural networks and support Vector Machines
19. Geophysical inversion versus machine learning in inverse problems10.1190/tle37120894.1 ↗
20. Oyetunji, O., and Stewart, R. (2021, January 28–30). Reservoir characterization using petrophysical analysis of the Volve Field, Norway. Proceedings of the EAGE Annual 82nd Conference & Exhibition 2021, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.10.3997/2214-4609.202113292 ↗
21. Vector-acoustic reverse time migration of Volve ocean-bottom cable data set without up/down decomposed wavefields10.1190/geo2014-0554.1 ↗
22. Norwegian Petroleum Directorate (2024, January 01). 4.1—Geology of the North Sea—The Norwegian Petroleum Directorate. Available online: https://www.npd.no/en/whats-new/publications/co2-atlases/co2-atlas-for-the-norwegian-continental-shelf/4-the-norwegian-north-sea/4.1-geology-of-the-north-sea/.
23. Wang, B., Sharma, J., Chen, J., and Persaud, P. (2021). Ensemble machine learning assisted reservoir characterization using field production data–an offshore field case study. Energies, 14.10.3390/en14041052 ↗
24. Structural evolution of minibasins on the utsira high, northern North Sea; implications for Jurassic sediment dispersal and reservoir distribution10.1144/1354-079309-011 ↗
25. Reservoir geology of the Utsira Formation at the first industrial-scale underground co 2 storage site (Sleipner area, North Sea)10.1144/GSL.SP.2004.233.01.11 ↗
26. Al Ghaithi, A., and Prasad, M. (2020). SEG Technical Program Expanded Abstracts, Society of Exploration Geophysicists.
27. Monitoring of CO2 injected at Sleipner using time-lapse seismic data10.1016/j.energy.2004.03.072 ↗
28. Equinor (2020, December 12). Volve Field Data Set Download. Volve Field Data Village Download—Data 2008–2016. Available online: https://www.equinor.com/en/what-we-do/digitalisation-in-our-dna/volve-field-data-village-download.html.
29. Seismic Detection and Estimation of Overpressures Part I: The Rock Physics Basis
30. On the elasticity of porous media: Quarterly publication of the Natural Research Society in Zurich
31. Gassmann’s fluid substitution and shear modulus variability in carbonates at laboratory seismic and ultrasonic frequencies10.1190/1.2358494 ↗
32. Shear-wave velocity estimation in porous rocks: Theoretical formulation, preliminary verification and applications10.1111/j.1365-2478.1992.tb00371.x ↗
33. Mavko, G., Mukerji, T., and Dvorkin, J. (2020). The Rock Physics Handbook, Cambridge University Press.10.1017/9781108333016 ↗
34. Bayesian seismic inversion based on rock-physics prior modeling for the joint estimation of acoustic impedance, porosity and lithofacies10.1016/j.jcp.2017.02.013 ↗
35. Gassmann fluid substitutions: A tutorial10.1190/1.1567211 ↗
36. Seismic properties of pore fluids10.1190/1.1443207 ↗
37. Bayesian time-lapse inversion10.1190/1.2196874 ↗
38. Quantitative seismology, theory and methods
39. Migration and inversion of Seismic Data10.1190/1.1441877 ↗
40. Simultaneous inversion of pre-stack seismic data
41. Formation velocity and density—The diagnostic basics for stratigraphic traps10.1190/1.1440465 ↗
42. 70 years of machine learning in Geoscience in review
43. Kingma, D.P., and Ba, J. (2015). Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimization. arXiv.
44. Theory of propagation of elastic waves in a fluid-saturated porous solid. I. Low-Frequency Range10.1121/1.1908239 ↗
45. Pelemo-Daniels, D., Nwafor, B.O., and Stewart, R.R. (2023). CO2 Injection Monitoring: Enhancing Time-Lapse Inversion for Injected Volume Estimation in the Utsira Formation, Sleipner Field, North Sea. J. Mar. Sci. Eng., 11.10.3390/jmse11122275 ↗
46. Seismic attenuation due to wave-induced flow10.1029/2003JB002639 ↗
47. Seismic wave attenuation and dispersion resulting from wave-induced flow in porous rocks—A review
48. A new equation of state for carbon dioxide covering the fluid region from the triple-point temperature to 1100 K at pressures up to 800 MPA10.1063/1.555991 ↗
49. Estimation of thickness and velocity changes of injected carbon dioxide layers from prestack time-lapse seismic data10.1190/1.3054659 ↗
50. Nwafor, B.O., Hermana, M., and Elsaadany, M. (2022). Geostatistical Inversion of Spectrally Broadened Seismic Data for Re-Evaluation of Oil Reservoir Continuity in Inas Field, Offshore Malay Basin. J. Mar. Sci. Eng., 10.10.3390/jmse10060727 ↗
51. Nwafor, B.O., and Hermana, M. (2022). Harmonic Extrapolation of Seismic Reflectivity Spectrum for Resolution Enhancement: An Insight from Inas Field, Offshore Malay Basin. Appl. Sci., 12.10.3390/app12115453 ↗
52. Chollet, F. (2017). Deep Learning with Python, Manning Publications.
53. Goodfellow, I., Bengio, Y., and Courville, A. (2017). Deep Learning, The MIT Press.
54. Equinor (2024, January 01). Sleipner 4D Seismic Dataset. Available online: https://co2datashare.org/dataset/sleipner-4d-seismic-dataset.
55. Equinor (2024, January 01). Volve Field Dataset; Volve Field Data Set Download—Equinor. Available online: https://www.equinor.com/energy/volve-data-sharing.