Child pages
  • OTM-012: Identifying conflicting sources of seismic signals

 

Identifying conflicting sources of seismic signals

 

Challenge ID

OTM:012

1

Title

Identifying conflicting sources of seismic signals

2

Theme ID

ON 1.1: Seismic Planning - Areas of poor coupling

3

Originator of Challenge

Onshore: OTM

4

Challenge Reviewer / initiator

PEMEX

 

General description

Overview of Challenge

5

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

Data quality from seismic surveys can be affected by the presence of conflicting sources of seismic signals. Noise from the surface which interferes with the seismic survey could include flares, road noise, oilfield infrastructure etc...

Baseline maps which identify assets and infrastructure likely to cause these, and thus enable a solution which can identify such sources would be valuable.  [WesternGeco experience in Australia had an instance where a flare was very clearly influencing seismic data]

6

Thematic information requirements

4. Obtain detailed land-use information,         12. Identify the presence of sub-surface or covered infrastructure,   14. Obtain detailed imagery of the surface,

7

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

Signals interfere with those of generated by seismic sweeps, and detrimentally affect the output data from the survey.  An understanding of the signal source and type, seismic lines could be planned to mitigate against this.

8

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

Anomalies in seismic surveys will be examined.  This examination will include consideration for conflicting sources of seismic signals - however this will only be done once the anomaly has been seen.

9

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

A map based product onto which noise from non-seismic sources can be marked would be very useful

10

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

EO could be useful in informing the planning process early on.

 

Challenge classification

 

11

Lifecycle stage

Pre license

Exp.

Dev.

Prod.

Decom.

Score from impact quantification [1]

2

4

0

0

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

Data quality

17

Technology Urgency

(How quickly does the user need the solution)

Immediately (0-2 years)

 

Information requirements

 

18

Update frequency

on a project by project basis / for each survey

19

Data Currently used

scouting, survey team

20

Spatial resolution

scouting, survey team

21

Thematic accuracy

 

22

Example formats

 

23

Timeliness

Reference data - timeliness not important

24

Geographic Extent

Reservoir footprint

25

Existing 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