|
Challenge ID |
OTM:008 |
||||
1 |
Title |
Determine historical ground movement for infrastructure planning |
||||
2 |
Theme ID |
ON 3.2: Subsidence monitoring - Infrastructure monitoring |
||||
3 |
Originator of Challenge |
Onshore: OTM |
||||
4 |
Challenge Reviewer / initiator |
BP, Statoil, PetroSA, Petronas |
||||
|
General description |
Overview of Challenge |
||||
5 |
What is the nature of the challenge? (What is not adequately addressed at present?) |
Use of historic ground movement data can influence infrastructure planning, through identification of ground movement trends, etc. It is important to know to what extent and in which direction the is ground moving, before any building/extraction occurs. |
||||
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? |
Influencing infrastructure planning |
||||
8 |
What do you currently do to address this challenge?/ How is this challenge conventionally addressed? |
Optical imagery is used |
||||
9 |
What kind of solution do you envisage could address this challenge? |
Historical SAR data acquired over areas where infrastructure is planned can be analysed to produce historical ground movement maps. Areas of subsidence / uplift can be identified and avoid when in the planning phase. |
||||
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 a useful complimentary technology |
||||
|
Challenge classification |
|
||||
11 |
Lifecycle stage |
Pre license |
Exp. |
Dev. |
Prod. |
Decom. |
Score from impact quantification [1] |
3 |
3 |
3 |
0 |
1 |
|
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 |
Infrastructure planning |
||||
17 |
Technology Urgency (How quickly does the user need the solution) |
Immediately (0-2 years) |
||||
|
Information requirements |
|
||||
18 |
Update frequency |
One off historic |
||||
19 |
Data Currently used |
|
||||
20 |
Spatial resolution |
|
||||
21 |
Thematic accuracy |
|
||||
22 |
Example formats |
GIS Shape file |
||||
23 |
Timeliness |
Within six months |
||||
24 |
Geographic Extent |
Development area only |
||||
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