3D Seismic Business Impact

The Business Impacts of 3D Seismic
Technologies on Petroleum Reservoir

Exploration & Production
TG4269 Geofisika Ekonomi & Manajemen
Prof. Dr. Ir. Sigit Sukmono, M.Sc, IPU

Professor in Reservoir Geophysics
FTTM ITB
Feb 2021 3D seismic impacts to exploration & production (by: Sigit Sukmono) 1
Contents
1. Introduction
2. Technology Advantages of 3D seismic
3. Business Impacts of 3D Seismic Technology
4. Measuring Confidence Indices
5. Measuring Uncertainty
6. Technology Post-Appraisals
7. Case Examples : Exploration, Development, EOR, Geohazards
References
1. Introduction
It was Walton (1972) who popularized the concept of three-dimensional seismic surveys. In 1975, first
3-D technical surveys were performed (Bone et al, 1976).
The 3-D seismic method is essentially an aerial data collection followed by the processing and
interpretation of a closely-spaced data volume. The results is a more detailed understanding of the
subsurface which able to contribute significantly to the problems of field appraisal, development and
production as well as to exploration.
2. Technology Advantages of 3D over 2D seismic
Major advantages of 3D over 2 D seismic are:

• Better migration and related resolution (particularly the lateral resolution). The results give better
positionings of reflections out-of-place because of dip, a more focuses energy spread over a Fresnel
zone, and collapses diffraction patterns from points and edges (Figures 1-3).
• Volume concept. Closely-spaced collected data permits 3D processing and interpretation of the data as
a volume. Geological objects are three-dimensional objects; thus, the 3D data volume will facilitate a
more accurate interpretation.
• With 3-D data volume, the interpreter can use the slicing and automatic tracking tools to comprehend
all the information in the data. In this way, the interpreter can deliver a more accurate and detailed map
or other products than by using 2D data.
• The time or depth slice of 3D data gives the true strike and dip; whereas the 2D data gives apparent
strike and dip. Multiple slicing can assist a quick construction of time or depth structure map since the
attitude of a reflection on a horizontal section indicates directly the strike of the reflecting surface.
Figure 1. Effect on Fresnel
zone size and shape of 2-D
and 3-D migration (Brown,
2001).
Figure 2. Model of two anticlines and one Figure 3. Improved structural continuity
fault with seismic data along Line 6 of an unconformity reflection resulting
showing comparative effects of 2-D and 3- from 2-D and 3-D migration (Brown,
D migration (from French, 1974). 2001).
Figure 4. Improved visibility of a flat spot reflection after removal of
interfering events by 3-D migration (Brown, 2001).
Figure 5. Areal coverage of a
3-D survey compared to the
coverage of a grid of live 2-D
lines, and the ability of each
to delineate a meandering
channel (Brown, 2001).
Figure 6. Illustration of a 3-D data volume in the Gulf of
Mexico (Sukmono and Ambarsari, 2019).
Figure 7. Recognized and approved terms for display products from 3-D seismic
data (Brown, 2001).
Figure 8. Illustration of various 3-D data volume displays to guide oil exploration in
the Gulf of Mexico (Sukmono and Ambarsari, 2019).
Figure 9. Relation between dip and strike of a seismic reflector
within a data volume (Brown, 2001).
Figure 10. Illustration of multiple slicing to assist a quick construction of time or depth
structure map (Sukmono and Ambarsari, 2019).
3. Business Impacts of 3D Seismic Technology
3-D seismic is an important tool to improve the exploration success and reserve. The success related to
the better structural stratigraphic interpretation which give better estimates on the field reserve,
platform size, number of well slots, and production facilities (Figure 11).
Aylor (1999) provides detail examples on the optimal uses of 3D seismic technologies to improve
business performances of BP Amoco. The group achieved a major turnaround in exploration
performance during 1993–97 as summarized below:
1. Production replacement, from 60% in 1992 to 178% in 1997.
2. Cost of finding dropped from U.S. $8/bbl in 1991 to less than U.S. $1/bbl in 1996
3. New resources improved from 200 million bbl oil equivalent (BOE) in 1991 to 1 billion BOE in 1996
4. Exploration drilled success rate jumped from 13% in 1991 to 47% in 1997.
Three instrumental factors in the improvement are: portfolio risk management, 3D seismic, and
acreage management.
BP Amoco case shows that 3D has had a major impact on production performance, which is also
reflected in field-reserves revision. During 1997, fields that had 3D-seismic coverage exhibited large
positive reserve revisions, while those with no or partial 3D seismic exhibited negative revisions. This
suggests that, when fields are managed with 3D seismic, there is better overall reservoir management
and the synergy with engineering and geological data creates a more economically viable business
venture.
This finding fits well with previous data collections that showed that 3D seismic could differentiate
high-risk from low-risk locations and could find completely new, previously unknown, low-risk
locations. It also supports previous data that showed that 3D seismic is good at finding high-rate zones
in fields that have significant reservoir, geologic, and production-performance heterogeneity
Figure 11. Area covered by 3-D surveys, exploratory wells drilled and volume of
oil in place for the period 1976 to 1994 in the Campos Basin offshore Brazil
(Brown, 2001)
Fig. 12—Amoco production replacement. the company made major improvements in its production replacement, from 60% in
1992 to 178% in 1997 (Aylor, 1999)
Fig. 13 Example of the ability of a 3D-seismic survey to separate good exploration prospects from poor ones. This example from an
exploration block in the North Sea shows eight prospects with “seal” probability of failure, Pf, generally between 20 and 50% before
acquisition of 3D-seismic data. After the 3D-seismic survey, two of the prospects have been convincingly confirmed with a 10% Pf
and six have been condemned with a Pf of 80 to 90%. This illustrates a highly effective technology in action that usually (75% of the
time in this case) condemns high-risk prospects but that occasionally reliably confirms them. The condemned prospects have saved
expensive dry holes. The confirmed ones can be drilled with lower risk of failure (Aylor, 1999).
Fig. 14—BP Amoco case showing the dramatic
impact of 3D seismic on drilling performance.
(Aylor, 1999).
Tables 2 and 3 show the significant impact of 3D seismic technology to the revision of reserves (Aylor, 1999).
Fig. 16 —The cross-plot of initial production vs reserves to differentiate poor, medium and
good prospects (Aylor, 1999). The 3D seismic technology gives more accurate estimates of
the reserves and thus the accuracy of the cross-plot as well.
4. Measuring Confidence Indices
It is often useful to measure the confidence of index of newly applied technologies as the applied
technologies often work well in certain geographic or stratigraphic situations and poorly in others.
Figure 17 shows an example of confidence factor computed on the basis of AVO. In this case a
formula is established to determine the confidence on how AVO analysis can be relied on predicting
well success. Indices have been constructed to place a numerical score on “rock data,” “model
discrimination,” “seismic data,” “model fit,” and “geological consistency.”
The rock data component can numerically characterize the degree of completeness, quality, and
relevance of rock data to the prospect. Characteristics that are considered are distance from
prospect, similarity of depositional setting, age, depth, pressure, number of wells, lateral consistency
between wells, whether shear data have been measured or estimated, and availability of cores.
Weights are applied to these and similar characteristics for the other criteria, and a formula is
computed for confidence, c = DRMDDS(AMF+BCg), where DR=rock data, MD=model discrimination,
DS=seismic data, A=scale factor for model fit, MF=model fit, B=scale factor for geological consistency,
and Cg=geological consistency. This confidence-index value is then used to determine success of the
technology in predicting an economical vs. uneconomical drilling outcome.
Fig. 17—Confidence factor computed on the basis of AVO which shows actual drilled results from 76
Amoco exploratory wells drilled during 1994–97, indicates that the confidence factor is very useful in
predicting whether the particular technology is able to predict drilling outcomes (Aylor, 1999).
5. Measuring Uncertainty
Measuring uncertainty is important to evaluate how effective is the use of technology. The reduction
of uncertainty means that there are more certain outcomes which lead to proper decision on the
most prudent course of action. High risk and high uncertainty typically exist before the application of
the technology.
Higher probability of success Ps (for confirmed prospects) and lower uncertainty for both confirmed
and condemned prospects are normally observed after applying highly effective technologies. Lower
uncertainty translates into easier decisions and quicker, more prudent actions.
To begin to measure uncertainty, the minimum, most likely, and maximum trap size, fetch area,
porosity, source thickness, and gas/oil ratio (among other factors) should be recorded before and after
a suite of technologies is applied.
Fig. 18—Uncertainty associated with exploration prospect and
development location (Aylor, 1999)..
Fig. 19—Effects of an effective technology applied to exploration prospects that have been
confirmed (top) and condemned (bottom) by the technology (Aylor, 1999).
6. Technology Post-Appraisals
A final measure worth considering when appraising the merits of a technology is to track the changes
in Ps for major risk components. A common practice is to characterize uncertainty by use of minimum,
most likely, and maximum estimates to characterize the uncertainty of a business decision or situation.
For example, a pre-technology assessment of structural risk, seal, reservoir, or source risk could be
carried out. This could be followed by an assessment of Ps for these parameters after application of
major technology suites. Highly effective technologies should either clearly condemn or confirm a risk
element. “Clear” here means lower uncertainty, denoting less of a spread between maximum and
minimum values of risk Ps. “Condemnation” or “confirmation” translates to a shift of Ps from an
ambiguous 50 to 60% Ps value to smaller values for condemnation and larger values for confirmation.
Highly effective technologies cause large shifts, and less effective technologies cause smaller shifts.
Fig. 8—Risk components used for portfolio risk management (Aylor, 1999).
The Business Impacts of 3D Seismic Technologies on
Petroleum Reservoir Exploration & Production
• Case Examples
• Exploration & Development Fields

TG4269 Geofisika Ekonomi & Manajemen FTTM ITB
Aug 2020 Overview of Reservoir Geophysics: Seismic Method and Expl. Field Example (by: Sigit 29
Sukmono)
Aug 2020 30
Combining Attributes….
Aug 2020 31
Gross Sand
THIN
THICK
Sukmono)
33
34
Sukmono)
Sukmono)
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
The Business Impacts of 3D Seismic Technologies on
Petroleum Reservoir Exploration & Production
• Case Examples
• EOR Fields & Shallow Geohazard

TG4269 Geofisika Ekonomi & Manajemen FTTM ITB
Sukmono)
Aug 2020 50
A surface + time
slice of 3D
seismic data
showing incise
valley and LST
basin-floor fan
deposits in
Central Sumatra,
Indonesia
Aug 2020 Overview of Reservoir Geophysics : Case Examples (by: Sigit Sukmono) 51
Example of
Multiattribute
for sand &
porosity
mapping
AI of sand-
shales overlaps.
Normal seismic
& AI inversion
not workable
(Sukmono, 2007)
(Sukmono, 2007)
Example of pseudo gamma-ray section construction
(Sukmono, 2007)
Drilling
results vs
Pseudo
gamma-
ray section
58
Illustration on Applied Technologies
In GOM Ultra-Deep Exploration
Drilling-sites selection : Sea-bed related hazards
N
N
Sea-bed morphology around drilling site. Note the drilling

risks due to the sea-canyon, unstable slope and active faults
REFERENCES
1. Aylor, W.K., Measuring the Impact of 3D Seismic on Business Performance, Journal of Petroleum Technology, SPE.
2. Brown, A.R., 2001, Interpretation of Three-Dimensional Seismic Data, AAPG-SEG
3. Sukmono, S. et al., 2006, Integrating Seismic Attributes for Reservoir Characterization in Melandong Field, North West
Java Basin, Indonesia, The Leading Edge, SEG, 532-538.
4. Sukmono, S., 2007, The Application of Multi-attribute Analysis in Mapping Lithology and Porosity in the Pematang-Sihapas
Groups of Central Sumatra Basin, Indonesia, the Leading Edge v26 no.2, 126-131.
5. Sukmono, S. et al, 2008, Seismic Reservoir Characterization of Southwest Betara Field, The Leading Edge Dec 2008, 260 –
267.
6. Sukmono, S. et al., 2017, Integration of 3D Seismic attributes for preliminary shallow geohazard identification in deep
water exploration area with no well data, First Break, v.35, 91-97.
7. Sukmono, S. and Ambarsari, D.S., 2019 Practical seismic interpretation for petroleum exploration (Bandung: ITB Press)

3D Seismic Business Impact

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

3D Seismic Business Impact

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Business Impacts of 3D Seismic

Technologies on Petroleum Reservoir

TG4269 Geofisika Ekonomi & Manajemen

Prof. Dr. Ir. Sigit Sukmono, M.Sc, IPU

Major advantages of 3D over 2 D seismic are:

Prof. Dr. Ir. Sigit Sukmono, M.Sc, IPU

Prof. Dr. Ir. Sigit Sukmono, M.Sc, IPU

Drilling-sites selection : Sea-bed related hazards

Sea-bed morphology around drilling site. Note the drilling

You might also like