Book contents
- Geophysics and Geosequestration
- Geophysics and Geosequestration
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Contributors
- Preface
- Acknowledgments
- Abbreviations
- Part I Introduction
- Part II Geophysical Techniques
- Chapter 4 Rock Physics of CO2 Storage Monitoring in Porous Media
- Chapter 5 Multicomponent Seismic Monitoring
- Chapter 6 Monitoring the Deformation Associated with the Geological Storage of CO2
- Chapter 7 Gravity
- Chapter 8 Estimating Saturation and Density Changes Caused by CO2 Injection at Sleipner
- Chapter 9 Electrical and Electromagnetic Methods
- Chapter 10 Microseismic Imaging of CO2 Injection
- Chapter 11 Well Logging
- Part III Case Studies
- Part IV Summary
- Index
- References
Chapter 9 - Electrical and Electromagnetic Methods
from Part II - Geophysical Techniques
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 19 April 2019
Book contents
- Geophysics and Geosequestration
- Geophysics and Geosequestration
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Contributors
- Preface
- Acknowledgments
- Abbreviations
- Part I Introduction
- Part II Geophysical Techniques
- Chapter 4 Rock Physics of CO2 Storage Monitoring in Porous Media
- Chapter 5 Multicomponent Seismic Monitoring
- Chapter 6 Monitoring the Deformation Associated with the Geological Storage of CO2
- Chapter 7 Gravity
- Chapter 8 Estimating Saturation and Density Changes Caused by CO2 Injection at Sleipner
- Chapter 9 Electrical and Electromagnetic Methods
- Chapter 10 Microseismic Imaging of CO2 Injection
- Chapter 11 Well Logging
- Part III Case Studies
- Part IV Summary
- Index
- References
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Geophysics and Geosequestration , pp. 154 - 167Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2019
References
Archie, G. E. (1942). The electrical resistivity log as an aid in determining some reservoir characteristics. Transactions of the AIME, 146: 54–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bergmann, P., Schmidt-Hattenberger, C., Kiessling, D., et al. (2012). Surface-downhole electrical resistivity tomography applied to monitoring of CO2 storage at Ketzin, Germany. Geophysics, 77: B253–B267.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bhuyian, A. H., Ghaderi, A., and Landro, M. (2011). CSEM sensitivity study of CO2 layers with uniform versus patchy saturation distributions. Expanded Abstracts, Society of Exploration Geohysicists Technical Program, 655–659.Google Scholar
Birkholzer, J. T., Zhou, Q., and Tsang, C.-F. (2009). Large-scale impact of CO2 storage in deep saline aquifers: A sensitivity study on pressure response in stratified systems. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 3: 181–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christensen, N. B., Sherlock, D., and Dodds, K. (2006). Monitoring CO2 injection with cross-hole electrical resistivity tomography. Exploration Geophysics, 37: 44–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Commer, M., Newman, G. A., Williams, K. H., and Hubbard, S. S. (2011). Three-dimensional induced polarization data inversion for complex resistivity. Geophysics, 76: F157–F171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Commer, M., Doetsch, J., Dafflon, B., Wu, Y., Daley, T. M., and Hubbard, S. S. (2016). Time-lapse 3-D electrical resistance tomography inversion for crosswell monitoring of dissolved and supercritical CO2 flow at two field sites: Escatawpa and Cranfield, Mississippi, USA. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 49: 297–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Doetsch, J., Kowalsky, M. B., Doughty, C., et al. (2013). Constraining CO2 simulations by coupled modeling and inversion of electrical resistance and gas composition data. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 18: 510–522.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eiken, O., Brevik, I., Arts, R., Lindeberg, E., and Fagervik, K. (2000). Seismic monitoring of CO2 injected into a marine aquifer. Expanded Abstracts, Society of Exploration Geophysicists Technical Program, 1623–1626.Google Scholar
Gasperikova, E., and Chen, J. (2009). A resolution study of non-seismic geophysical monitoring tools for monitoring of CO2 injection into coal beds. In Eide, L. I. (ed.), Carbon dioxide capture for storage in deep geologic formations. Results from the CO2 Capture Project, Vol. 3: Advances in CO2 capture and storage technology. Berkshire: CPL Press, 403–420.Google Scholar
Gasperikova, E., and Hoversten, G. M. (2006). A feasibility study of nonseismic geophysical methods for monitoring geologic CO2 sequestration. Leading Edge, 25: 1282–1288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gasperikova, E., and Morrison, H. F. (2019). Electrical and electromagnetic techniques for CO2 monitoring. In Huang, L. (ed.), Geophysical monitoring for geologic carbon sequestration. Hoboken, NJ: AGU Wiley.Google Scholar
Grayver, A. V., Streich, R., and Ritter, O. (2014). 3D inversion and resolution analysis of land-based CSEM data from the Ketzin CO2 storage formation. Geophysics, 79: E101–E114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gueguen, Y. (1994). Introduction to the physics of rocks. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Hagrey, S. A. (2012). 2D optimized electrode arrays for borehole resistivity tomography and CO2 sequestration modelling. Pure and Applied Geophysics, 169: 1283–1292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoversten, G. M., Gritto, R., Washbourne, J., and Daley, T. (2003). Pressure and fluid saturation prediction in a multicomponent reservoir using combined seismic and electromagnetic imaging. Geophysics, 68: 1580–1591.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lu, J., Kharaka, Y. K., Thordsen, J. J., et al. (2012). CO2 rock-brine interactions in Lower Tuscaloosa Formation at Cranfield CO2 sequestration site, Mississippi, U.S.A. Chemical Geology, 291: 269–277.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morrison, H. F., and Gasperikova, E. The Berkeley course in applied geophysics (interactive textbook). http://appliedgeophysics.berkeley.eduGoogle Scholar
Nakatsuka, Y., Xue, Z., Garcia, H., and Matsuoka, T. (2010). Experimental study on CO2 monitoring and quantification of stored CO2 in saline formations using resistivity measurements. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 4: 209–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oldenburg, D. W., and Li, Y. (2005). Inversion for applied geophysics: A tutorial. In Butler, D. K. (ed.), Investigations in geophysics, No. 13: Near-surface geophysics. Society for Exploration in Geophysics, 89–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rucker, C., Gunther, T., and Spitzer, K. (2006). Three-dimensional modelling and inversion of dc resistivity data incorporating topography. I. Modelling. Geophysical Journal International, 166: 495–505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmidt-Hattenberger, C., Bergmann, P., Bosing, D., et al. (2013). Electrical resistivity tomography (ERT) for monitoring of CO2 migration: From tool development to reservoir surveillance at the Ketzin pilot site. Energy Procedia, 37: 4268–4275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Streich, R. (2016). Controlled-source electromagnetic approaches for hydrocarbon exploration and monitoring on land. Surveys in Geophysics, 37: 47–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Telford, W. M., Geldart, L. P., and Sheriff, R. F. (1990). Applied geophysics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tikhonov, A. V., and Arsenin, V. Y. (1977). Solution of ill-posed problems. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar
Zhou, B., and Greenhalgh, S. A. (2000). Cross-hole resistivity tomography using different electrode configurations. Geophysical Prospecting, 48: 887–912.Google Scholar
- 2
- Cited by