Child pages
  • OTM-006: Technical verification relation to injection of fracking fluids

 

Technical verification relation to injection of fracking fluids

 

Challenge ID

OTM:006

1

Title

Regulatory verification relation to injection of fracking fluids

2

Theme ID

ON 3.3: Subsidence monitoring - Reservoir management

3

Originator of Challenge

Onshore: OTM

4

Challenge Reviewer / initiator

 

 

General description

Overview of Challenge

5

What is the nature of the challenge? (What is not adequately addressed at present?)

It is possible that injected fluids do not reach their targetted destinations, and instead move to non-production targets. If unnecessary loss of water in fracking operations can be identified, large costs could be saved.

6

Thematic information requirements

1. Obtain detailed topographic information,            13. Monitor ground movement,

7

Nature of the challenge - What effect does this challenge have on operations?

Cost savings, through reduced water and chemical usage

8

What do you currently do to address this challenge?/ How is this challenge conventionally addressed?

Downhole tools can track fluid movement to a degree.  Tracers in injected fluids can also be used, but these also have their limitations.

9

What kind of solution do you envisage could address this challenge?

Ground movement satellite imagery could indicate sub-surface movement and infer fluid migration of fracking fluids

10

What is your view on the capability of technology to meet this need? – are you currently using EO tech? If not, why not?

Fluid migration in the reservoir can be inferred from ground movement data.

 

Challenge classification

 

11

Lifecycle stage

Pre license

Exp.

Dev.

Prod.

Decom.

Score from impact quantification [1]

0

0

0

3

0

12

Climate classification

NOT CLIMATE SPECIFIC

13

Geographic context/restrictions

Generic onshore (Unspecified)

14

Topographic classification / Offshore classification

Generic onshore (Unspecified)

15

Seasonal variations

Any season

16

Impact Area

Operational cost reduction

17

Technology Urgency

(How quickly does the user need the solution)

Immediately (0-2 years)

 

Information requirements

 

18

Update frequency

daily / weekly /annually (application dependent)

19

Data Currently used

 

20

Spatial resolution

 

21

Thematic accuracy

 

22

Example formats

GIS Shape file

23

Timeliness

Within a month

24

Geographic Extent

Reservoir footprint

25

Existing standards

No industry standards.  TRE have their own internal INSAR standards


 


[1] Impact quantification scores: 4 – Critical/ enabling; 3 – Significant/ competitive advantage; 2 – Important but non-essential; 1 – Nice to have; 0 – No impact, need satisfied with existing technology