Technology Strategy for
Exploration and Reservoir Characterization
Lead Party
FORCE (www.force.org)
-1-
OG21 Technology Target Area
Exploration and Reservoir Characterization
Technology Strategy Plan
Authors:
Arild Haugen (NPD/FORCE)
John R Berry (BP)
Per Arne Bjørkum (Statoil)
Robert J Hofer (ConocoPhillips)
Robert P Johannessen (Total)
Kristian Kolbjørnsen (Lundin Norway AS)
Arnd Wilhelms (Norsk Hydro)
Final version: 17/06/2005
-2-
Technology Strategy for
Exploration and Reservoir Characterization
1.
Executive Summary ........................................................................................................... 4
1.1
Background: ............................................................................................................... 4
1.2
Status and gaps: .......................................................................................................... 5
1.3
Conclusions: ............................................................................................................... 6
2. Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 8
2.1
Background ................................................................................................................ 8
3. Inventory mapping ........................................................................................................... 15
3.1
Present Status ........................................................................................................... 15
3.1.1
Geophysics ....................................................................................................... 15
3.1.2
Sedimentology and Stratigraphy ...................................................................... 18
3.1.3
Structural Geology ........................................................................................... 19
3.1.4
Basin Analysis: Source rocks, generation and migration ................................. 20
3.1.5
Rock Physics .................................................................................................... 20
3.1.6
Geomechanics .................................................................................................. 20
3.1.7
Reservoir Modelling and Simulation ............................................................... 21
3.2
Ongoing initiatives ................................................................................................... 22
4. Gap analysis ..................................................................................................................... 23
4.1
Geophysics ............................................................................................................... 23
4.2
Sedimentology and Stratigraphy .............................................................................. 24
4.3
Structural Geology ................................................................................................... 25
4.4
Basin analysis: Source rocks, generation and migration .......................................... 26
4.5
Rock Physics ............................................................................................................ 26
4.6
Geomechanics .......................................................................................................... 27
4.7
Reservoir Modelling and Simulation ....................................................................... 27
5. Recommendations ............................................................................................................ 29
5.1
Recommended activities and focus areas. ................................................................ 29
5.2
Recommended projects ............................................................................................ 31
Appendix: Technology Gaps – Tables ................................................................................. 34
Geophysics - Seismic Data Acquisition Gaps .................................................................. 34
Geophysics - Seismic Processing and Modelling Gaps ................................................... 35
Geophysics - Seismic Interpretation Gaps ....................................................................... 36
Sedimentology and Stratigraphy Gaps ............................................................................. 37
Structural Geology Gaps .................................................................................................. 38
Rock Physics Gaps ........................................................................................................... 41
Geomechanics Gaps ......................................................................................................... 42
Reservoir Modelling and Simulation Gaps ...................................................................... 43
-3-
1.
Executive Summary
1.1
Background:
The Norwegian Continental Shelf (NCS) is facing considerable challenges with regards to
reserve replacement and ultimate field recoveries. Exploration and Reservoir Characterization
will play a key role in achieving these targets.
The forward production prognosis (sustainable curve) for the NCS assumes that in 20 years
more than 50% of the production will come from resources yet to be found.
It is estimated that more than 26% of the resources on the NCS are undiscovered. The
undiscovered resources are evenly distributed between the North Sea, Norwegian Sea and the
Barents Sea. Only significant and continuous Exploration efforts can secure the realization of
this prognosis, and the upside is a lot bigger than the downside since possible resources in the
area under discussion with Russia, larger than the North Sea sector south of the 62nd parallel,
are not included in the estimates above.
Large resources will presently remain in the existing fields after projected shutdowns. The
goals for improved oil recovery (IOR) are ambitious (Recovery factors of 50% for oil and
75% for gas respectively), statistics show current figures of 45%, and there might be reasons
to adjust the targets upwards. NPD is presently reviewing that, and the results should be
available around July 2005. In order to achieve these goals there is a need for a combination
of new and enhanced IOR technology together with enhanced Reservoir Characterization
Methodology.
This report deals with both Exploration and Reservoir Characterization since technologies are
common for both areas. Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR) issues are treated by a separate TTAgroup in OG21 (Stimulated Recovery) However, the Stimulated Recovery TTA-report does
not cover reservoir characterization issues.
The lead time from discovery to production is decreasing for marginal fields. The main reason
for this is a combination of availability and price in the gas/oil market as well as technological
developments and the entry of smaller companies onto the shelf. Marginal discoveries
constitute around 6% of the present remaining resources. The same combination of market
conditions and technology together with tax incentives will play a significant role. This report
will only focus on knowledge and technology.
-4-
Exploration and Reservoir Characterization are divided into the following seven elements in
this report: Geophysics, Sedimentology/Stratigraphy, Structural Geology, Basin Analysis,
Rock Physics, Geomechanics and Reservoir Simulation and Modelling. Drilling and real time
reservoir management are covered by other OG21 TTA–reports.
1.2
Status and gaps:
The NCS is recognized as one of the leading technology areas in the world with respect to
implementation of novel technology and is characterized by a high level of technical
expertise. Policies related to data sharing, availability and storage are exceptional.
Exploration is using advanced seismic acquisition techniques and interpretation models.
A key factor for reducing exploration risk is the calibration of seismic data reliably with both
lithology and fluid information, here more work is needed. Additionally are items related to
imaging problems (e.g. multiples, complex geometries) still unresolved?
A wealth of data exists in the more mature areas of the NCS (North Sea and Haltenbanken
area). Here integration of interdisciplinary data is a main challenge. Lack of underground
data poses problems in other parts of the NCS (Vøring and Møre basins). The scarcity of
wells in these areas leads to uncertainties in the geological understanding. Basin analysis and
depositional modelling are essential for predicting where hydrocarbons are generated and
predictive models and improved process understanding is crucial.
Despite a high level of sophistication, current modelling techniques do rarely honour all
available data. Methods and software for combining core and log data should be developed
further. Seismic data do probably contain more information about lithology and fluids than
utilized today. Geological models do rarely take into account dynamical data, as for instance
data from production logging. Emerging technologies, like seabed logging using
electromagnetic (EM) measurements, will be areas of future focus.
Interdisciplinary integration is a key feature of modern reservoir characterization, where
available data and specialist knowledge are combined into a consistent reservoir description.
Advanced workstations and software tools have made computerized reservoir models a
standardized part of all petroleum exploration and production. The models describe our best
understanding of the tectonic and depositional history of the reservoir, as well as the current
reservoir conditions.
-5-
Modern reservoir characterization methods are typically statistical in nature, but a further
development of uncertainty handling is necessary. A systematic approach for handling both
uncertainties in data sources and uncertainties in basic models is needed. Fast simulation
techniques are necessary to generate models spanning the event space, covering both
underground based and model-based uncertainties.
Methods for predicting clastic fault-seal have been developed, but their predictive abilities
should be improved. Tools to evaluate and model the behaviour of fractures and faults in
chalk reservoirs are not readily available.
Data preparation and data evaluation are time consuming parts of exploration and reservoir
characterization. Maintenance of high-quality databases is a constant challenge for the
industry and should be given further focus. Also there are many datatypes that do not have
industry standard databases, e g rock physics, biostratigraphy and geochemistry. Technology
that can improve data handling and data processing is critical for all decision-making. An
example of this type of technology is open standards for data communication between
software tools. Another example is technology for processing seismic data.
Norwegian academias cover a broad spectrum of disciplines important for both exploration
and reservoir characterization. Selected areas within education and research relevant to the
petroleum industry should be improved, in order to have access to qualified personnel in the
future. These areas include biostratigraphy, structural geology, fault-seal analysis and
petrophysics. It is however a question whether Norway should prioritize these areas as long as
the expertise exists abroad (structural geology, fault-seal analysis). Some of these areas are
however lacking worldwide expertise, and Norway has an opportunity to fill these gaps in
areas like biostratigraphy and petrophysics. A survey of the petroleum relevant activities at
the Universities resulting in a catalog of projects and personnel should be compiled.
1.3
Conclusions:
Based on the inventory and technology gap analysis the following areas should be given
priority:


Advances in seismic acquisition, processing and workflows need continuous attention
in order to provide better images in complex areas
Improved Lithology and Fluid Prediction using full elastic wave field (4C, EM)
-6-

4D and Life of Field Seismic integration with rock physics

Depth migrated seismic as the new standard for interpretation (special attention on the
velocity model construction)

Integrated Geomechanics software and work flows are needed as part of an integrated
reservoir modeling work flow.
Data integration (e.g. static and dynamic) is a reoccurring theme throughout most
Exploration and Reservoir Characterization elements and must be considered a key
area to improve tools. There is no single software tool capable of providing a fully
integrated Reservoir Model all the way from Seismic, through Geo Model to Flow
Model due to problems with moving data, changing scales (upscaling) and common






standards/workflows.
Improved modelling and simulation of reservoir heterogeneities e.g. the behaviour of
fault and fractures on reservoir performance.
Uncertainty analysis to provide probabilistic results to take account of a range of
possible outcomes.
Development of an integrated tool to handle fault seal analysis, fracture analysis,
drilling engineering, logging, and seismic data.
Calibration of stratigraphy, reservoir, source rock and thermal history in underexplored basins.
It is recommended to perform a feasibility study and evaluation of the possible
benefits of a stratigraphic well through the basalt area in the Vøring and /or Møre
Basin to gather data, promote research and stimulate exploration activity.

Development of industry standards for additional datatypes and maintenance of highquality databases and data handling.

There should be a strong focus on knowledge creation, competence building and
collaboration between companies, contractors and academia. Some strategic
recommendations about the research and educational activities at the universities
should be made to avoid misunderstanding related to industry needs
Norwegian knowledge and technology has already had a great international influence and
most of the proposals in this document will have worldwide applications. In order to continue
to achieve this it is required to take into account worldwide knowledge, data and technology
developments.
-7-
2.
Introduction
The work reported in this document is the result of the collaboration effort of representatives
from several companies on the Norwegian Continental Shelf (NCS). It should be noted that
the strategy presented herein is the cooperative views of the group of representatives and does
not necessarily represent the views of each company.
2.1
Background
The overall mandate for OG21 is to generate new technology and knowledge to ensure the
profitable, environment-friendly development of the resources on the Norwegian Continental
Shelf (NCS) and to enhance the industry’s international competitiveness by producing
attractive new technology products and system solutions.
The work group’s mandate is given by the OG21 board who in cooperation with the
Norwegian oil and gas industry, has identified Exploration and Reservoir Characterization as
one of the Technology Target Areas (TTA) that needs focus, ref. the National Technology
Strategy OG21.
This report is focussed on the NCS, but the highlighted technology and knowledge needs are
also relevant internationally.
The Norwegian petroleum provinces vary in maturity, demonstrated on the above figure by
the level of produced reserves shown in red, reserves in blue and best estimate of remaining
-8-
economically recoverable resources in yellow. Note that the latter are estimates based on
today’s knowledge, and that any volumes in the area under discussion with Russia are not
included.
The North Sea is the most mature province, with a well-developed infrastructure for
production and transportation in the areas close to the UK border.
Exploration in the North Sea has been successful, with more than 50 fields in production since
its opening in 1965 and there is still a substantial potential for new discoveries to be made.
Exploration in the Norwegian Sea started in 1980 and there are now six producing fields in
this province. The eastern part of the area is reasonably well known, whereas the deep-water
areas to the west are less explored. Areas near the coast are not opened for petroleum
activities due to environmental and fishery reasons.
Many small gas discoveries have been made in the southern part of the Barents Sea; but there
are vast unexplored areas to the east and north.
Together with the frontier areas in the Norwegian Sea, the Norwegian Barents Sea is believed
to be a petroleum province where there is a potential for making large discoveries.
The figure above shows that 26 % of the total estimated economically recoverable reserves on
the NCS still remain to be discovered.
-9-
The undiscovered resources reflect the exploration potential based on today’s knowledge and
understanding. As new exploration activity proves up new plays and new petroleum systems,
the yet to find potential is adjusted.
More than 60 discoveries are not yet approved for development for various reasons. The
expected resource potential represents 6 % of the total in the present estimates.
Another 6 % of the total resources are related to the goal for improved oil and gas recovery,
and to date 130 improved recovery projects in fields are under assessment. The present
national goal is to reach an average recovery factor for oil of 50 % and 75 % for gas.
As seen from the figure above the IOR curve has flattened out lately (updated 2003), but the
recent increase in the oil prices will probably lead to an increased effort within this area.
- 10 -
The undiscovered resources are fairly evenly distributed between the three main regions on
the NCS in NPD’s present estimates. However the uncertainty is much higher in the northern
areas compared to the North Sea, and some companies operate with higher expected volumes
in The Norwegian Sea.
- 11 -
The figure above shows the prognosis for future petroleum production. This prognosis
includes expected new discoveries, and in 20 years from now half the production depends on
new discoveries.
There has been a decline in the number of exploration wells during the last years. A large
increase in the activity was expected for 2005, but shortage of rigs has been a limitation.
- 12 -
The total volume of discoveries and the field size have decreased through the years.
The above figure from 2003 shows that Norway still had a positive value creation within
exploration.It is, however, important to have a critical view on cost versus value creation. The
UK example suggests that one has to be aware of “over-exploring” an area.
- 13 -
By comparing the UK versus the Norwegian sector of the North Sea it seems that the
Norwegian side is still under-explored. Recent exploration activities in the North Sea have
resulted in several small, but commercial discoveries. There is now a higher focus on looking
for stratigraphic traps and more subtle structures in complex areas.
The figure above shows that the lead time from discovery to production has been significantly reduced during
the last decade. However, in order to analyse this one needs to split between exploration from platforms, stand
alones and sub-sea tie-ins. Lead times were for a long time controlled by the lack of available gas markets. Now
the controlling factors are gas transportation and gas processing availabilities.
- 14 -
3.
Inventory mapping
Reservoir Characterization and Exploration has been split into seven elements:
 Geophysics
 Sedimentology and Stratigraphy
 Structural Geology
 Basin Analysis: Hydrocarbon Source Rocks, Generation and Migration.
 Rock Physics
 Geomechanics
 Reservoir Simulation and Modelling
3.1
Present Status
3.1.1 Geophysics
Norway has had a leading role in the development and application of geophysical methods
since the 1970’s. Companies like Geco and PGS have been market leaders in building
seismic vessels and developing technology for efficient 3D data acquisition.
The main reason for this technical success is the companies’ ability to integrate experiences
from related industry. The towing technology used by the Norwegian fishing vessels was the
basis for the gun- and multi-streamer handling systems for the large gun arrays and wide
multi-streamers. Purpose built vessels for the Norwegian navy were modified for the PGS
class of Ramform vessels. The deployment of multi-streamers (from 2 in the mid 1980’s to
12+ today) is the main contributor to the favourable price/performance for 3D, which also
makes it possible to use 3D as an exploration tool. This has reduced the lead-time from
license award to development.
- 15 -
The above figure shows that 3D seismic has played a very significant role within E&P.
Lately Norway has also been instrumental in developing 4D and 4C technology in offshore
areas. However, there has been a tendency for Norwegian companies to be absorbed by the
major international contractors (Geco, Geoteam, Technoguide (Petrel), Voxelvision EMGS
etc).
Recent advances in seismic acquisition techniques have produced significant improvements
regarding positioning and resolution. 4C seismic (with receivers on the water bottom) has
been used in various areas and has proved to be very efficient in solving problems with gas
clouds and verifying Direct Hydrocarbon Indicators. Major improvements in data quality have
been achieved by using p-waves recorded on the water bottom, but the potential of shear
waves has still not been fully utilised. Multi-azimuth recording has also been successful and
there seems to be a potential in recording with unconventional new geometries in order to
solve imaging problems in complex areas. Recent advances within 3D visualisation and
immersive environments for seismic interpretation and communication hold a lot of
unrealised potential for integrated work arenas both for exploration and reservoir
characterization issues.
- 16 -
The above published example from BP’s Foinaven field shows that the recovery rate has been
increasing in parallel with the technology development within the seismic industry. However,
imaging alone would not have contributed to added value unless drilling and completion
technology advances allowed econimically recovering the oil and gas we now can “see”.
Horizontal wells, multi-lateral wells drilled and completed at the costs we used to pay for one
vertical penetration have revolutionalized the field development options.
The usage of pre-stack data for Inversion, AVO-studies etc has traditionally been based on
multi-cubes (near- and far offset stacks). Usage of the full pre-stack dataset for such Lithology
and Fluid Predictions is gaining interest.
4D monitoring of reservoirs has now become very common, and ‘Life of Field Seismic’
(LoFS) provides an opportunity to provide 4D on demand. LoFS is installed for the first time
in Norway at the Valhall Field. It is hard to put value on the effect of the 4D technology, but
this has been done by the operators in the following cases:
Gullfaks:
Statfjord North:
Draugen:
Norne:
Valhall:
Net Value > $600 mill
Value 4 43 mill, Cost $ 3 mill
Value > $84 mill Cost $ 4 mill
Revised drilling plans: $30 mill
Expected increase in recovery rate: 3% (60 million barrels)
- 17 -
Modern data processing technology together with huge increase in computer power have
resulted in great improvements in data quality (improved signal/noise, multiple attenuation
etc). This means that there is a great potential for reprocessing of older data.
Also the increase in data volumes related to multiple seismic cubes, 4D seismic and dynamic
data causes big challenges.
Work stations and visualisation systems have made it possible to integrate several data types.
The project lead-time has, due to the efficiency of such systems, been reduced from year(s) to
months.
Electro-Magnetic (EM) recording is an emerging technology that can give valuable
information together with more traditional seismic. At present, its applications are limited to
prospects shallower than approximately 2 kms of burial. Shallow water depths are still a
challenge.
3.1.2 Sedimentology and Stratigraphy
Through the last 40 years Norwegian universities and professionals have developed certain
strongholds in which they have excelled. These include a strong environment for
sedimentology and sequence stratigraphy studies at various universities and companies, basin
modelling, and forward basin fill modelling. As far as it concerns stratigraphic expertise, this
has weathered both in Oslo, Trondheim and Bergen.
Presently there are no major private consultant firms offering services for sedimentologic or
stratigraphic expertise, except APT and Geolab Nor. This compares poorly to the U.K., where
a wealth of university and private company research environments have developed (ref. to
JIPs with universities of Leeds, Liverpool; various consultant firms). This is mainly due to the
fact that most students in the field of sedimentology and stratigraphy became employees of
Norwegian companies.
An extensive core database exists and is accessible to the industry for stratigraphic and
sedimentology studies. Uncertainties in stratigraphy remain in numerous basins (Atlantic
Margin, Vøring, Møre, Norwegian-Danish Basin, Farsund) due to limited well calibration.
The technical committee within Force covers relevant topics within this area, but reservoir
prediction from seismic and uncertainty evaluations in reservoir characterization are technical
areas in need of further development.
- 18 -
3D modelling of depositional packages similar to 2D modelling in 1980-1990
In the period 1980-1990, several international companies and universities developed
computerized packages that modeled depositional processes in 2D. Parameters used were
creation of accommodation space provided by changes in rates of subsidence modulated by
eustatic sea level, and variations in sediment input. These packages were used to visualize and
monitor the development of depositional sequences and their stacking patterns in two
dimensions.
Immersive reservoir visualisation as a tool for reservoir development and management is a
related implementation from the same basic innovations as 4D seismic, augmented by
advances in 3D computer graphics and virtual reality animation. Most operators and many
service providers offer such solutions, most of which claim special advantages. BP’s HIVE,
Norsk Hydro’s CAVE and Statoil’s Visionarium are good examples. Such tools represent
valuable improvements in reservoir modelling and visualisation of these complex structures,
and function also as a means to facilitate better interaction between disciplines in the
previously quite rigid work environment of most oil companies. They illustrate well the
power of seismic and other imaging methods not only for exploration, but also in the
producing phase of the reservoir.
3.1.3 Structural Geology
We understand a lot about structural, stratigraphic and sedimentologic processes. The key to
successes in existing and future plays is effective integration. Future exploration and
production will include oil and gas in the under-explored deeper areas of basins and more
subtle stratigraphic traps. In areas of poor seismic quality the interpretation of accumulations,
reservoir presence and assessment of compartmentalization of the reservoirs is often difficult.
The Millenium Atlas was a very good piece of regional work, but lacks detail at prospect and
reservoir levels.
Fault seal analysis has not evolved significantly during the last decade. Both in exploration
and in field production our ability to predict fault behaviour is poor even though several
commercial applications exist. More open access to relevant field data could improve the
current technology and stimulate new ideas. Similarly the detection and characterization of
fractures is an area that needs improvement.
Predicting reservoir performance in fractured reservoirs (e.g. chalk) is also still a challenge in
the industry. Integrated interpretation of data from drilling engineering, logging and seismic is
needed in order to close the gap in this area.
- 19 -
3.1.4 Basin Analysis: Source rocks, generation and migration
Over most of the NCS the source rocks are well known and ‘standard’ methods are used to
interpret when hydrocarbons are expelled and to predict their migration through time into
potential oil or gas fields. Existing interpretation methods rely on a large database of
geochemical information derived from wells. Therefore, the most reliable predictions are in
areas of dense drilling. ‘Frontier’ areas, like the Arctic, Vøring, Møre and Norwegian/Danish
Basins are less well understood. The lateral variations in heat flow and resulting thermal
histories of both source rocks and reservoir rocks are not well enough constrained. This makes
the pre-drill assessments of maturity, charge and diagenesis uncertain.
It is necessary to locate the oil and gas within these basins by combining structural, pressure
and crustal heat flow models in areas that have little well data for calibration.
Key uncertainties remain related to the actual Base Cretaceous Unconformity depth and
source rock quantity and quality in the Cretaceous and Palaeozoic.
3.1.5 Rock Physics
Rock physics can be described as the link between geology, petrophysics and geophysics, i.e.
physical properties of rocks and geophysical observations.
Modern methods include using seismic in a more quantitative manner to determine variations
in fracture density, intensity, or variations of shale volume, porosity or saturation. There are
also techniques to categorize the data according to depositional and diagenetic history.
Petrophysical analysis and interpretations plays an important role in order to get reliable log
data for analysis and integration.
Typical applications of Rock Physical studies are feasibility studies, e.g. predicting the effect
of presumed reservoir changes. It can help to predict formation properties and/or fluid types
and to calculate reserves through reservoir property prediction.
3.1.6 Geomechanics
Geomechanics has mostly been used in a reactive mode in the industry, often in response to
drilling problems in field developments. During the last decade, more studies have been
performed in the field appraisal stage including sand production evaluations for optimising
completion design and well bore stability to estimate drilling performance. Waste and cuttings
- 20 -
disposal wells are designed early in the field planning to handle waste from the drilling phase
and if stimulation is required to achieve acceptable economic rates, hydraulic fracturing
design has also been executed. The geomechanics applications around drilling and wells are
well established, however, they are very often performed in isolation and not in an integrated
fashion. They are not well linked to the geomechanics of the field development over geologic
time either.
The use of geomechanics in reservoir performance prediction is only rarely applied currently
and is often poorly linked to the geomechanical processes over geologic time. Geomechanics
software, laboratories equipped to measure deformation under subsurface conditions and
standardised workflows for performing modelling of fields through time will ease
geomechanics application and make the results consistent and more unique.
3.1.7 Reservoir Modelling and Simulation
Reservoir modelling concerns integration of all available data into a consistent model
describing the current understanding of the reservoir. Advanced workstations and software
tools have made computerized models a standardized part of all exploration and production.
A strong Norwegian environment has resulted in several commercial companies offering
reservoir modelling software, major companies like Roxar and Technoguide (now part of
Schlumberger), but also several smaller companies like GeoCap and the Canadian-based
Geomodelling Technology.
Modern reservoir characterization methods are typically statistical in nature, and handling of
uncertainty is an integral part of all reservoir modelling. Norway has kept a strong position in
geostatistics, located both in Oslo and in Trondheim. One current challenge is to combine a
statistical description with a sound geological understanding. Another challenge is to
condition the statistical models to all available data.
Integration of data types involves handling of data defined at different length scales, like
seismic data, well data, lab data and dynamic field data. Scale issues (e.g. upscaling) are
hence fundamental for all modelling. 3D visualization of data has been the standard for some
time, and 4D seismic is commonly used to try and track the movement of fluids, oil, gas and
water, and to track changes in reservoir properties with time. Steadily increasing computing
capabilities have already provided the ability to store large amounts of different types of data.
As the Norway fields mature the time window for Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR) is getting
shorter and for this to be successful it must be possible to integrate, manipulate and interpret
large data sets rapidly.
- 21 -
Static reservoir models are used as input to dynamic flow models, applied for predictions of
reservoir behaviour under production. Norwegian environments are active with significant
contributions inside several areas of flow simulation technology, for instance streamline
technology. The flow models are important for conditioning the static models to dynamic
data; production data, pressure data, and 4D data.
In addition there is a need to manage uncertainty and flexibility in the History Matching
process and match to new data types such as 4D seismic. New tools that allow top quality data
integration and viewing are only just beginning to become available and it is critical that the
industry makes full use of the steadily improving computer hardware and software, whilst at
the same time developing processes to prioritise/filter the data for interpretation.
Additional requirements in reservoir modelling are time efficient ways to test alternative
geological models and the impact these will have on flow characteristics.
3.2
Ongoing initiatives
Several initiatives under the FORCE umbrella already address topics relating to exploration
and reservoir characterization. The technical committees on “Seismic Methods”,
“Visualization”, “Sedimentology and Stratigraphy”, “Structural Geology” and “Reservoir
Characterization” cover several aspects of the topics raised below. Lately there has been a
trend to look for a more integrated approach between the various committees especially when
it comes to arranging seminars.
The seminar activity in FORCE is a valuable tool in building networks, exchange ideas and
stimulate knowledge creation.
Additionally the industry is currently involved in a large number of projects to address the key
stratigraphic and structural uncertainties that exist in the Møre and Vøring Basins (Nerc,
iSimm, Bat, Tumod).
The joint industry effort called “Diskos initiative” has provided a good foundation for
efficient data management in Norway, but is unfortunately only handling a very limited suite
of data types.
- 22 -
4.
Gap analysis
Detailed descriptions of the gaps can be found in the appendix.
4.1
Geophysics
There are several complex areas on the NCS which need special attention. Some reservoirs
are obscured by gas chimneys. Basalt flows cover large areas in the western Norwegian Sea
and in the Northern Barents Sea. In such areas it may be necessary to gather well
information. Complex water bottom topography (Ormen Lange) and shallow channels
(Southern North Sea) cause imaging problems and create difficult multiples. Complex
overburden (including anisotropy effects) creates problems in imaging deeper structures. This
is especially relevant for mapping deeper areas in the North Sea. Imaging of salt domes
requires special attention both in the North Sea and in the Barents Sea. In order to solve the
above problems future focus should be put on creating the proper depth models as soon as
possible in the processing sequence. Depth migration also means that special attention should
be put on velocity modelling.
The Northern Barents Sea has special problems due to erosion in large areas where a thin
Quaternary layer covers very hard Triassic rocks. This problem could be addressed by using a
shear wave source on the sea floor.
In the North Sea there is still a large potential for finding stratigraphic traps – sand injectites
etc. This will require development and usage of the full suite of multi-offset data for P- as
well as S-waves: full elastic processing. The potential of enhancing the processing technology
on 4C data could be strengthened in a 4C processing consortium (4CC)
Gas hydrates are getting more into focus. Seismic technology can be used to help in the
identification and mapping of such accumulations.
Heavy Oil (e.g Linerle) is always a challenge when encountered. Today there are no available
technologies to discriminate oil densities from seismic data.
Work stations and visualization systems should be further developed and integrated with data
types and applications. More automation in interpretation of horizons and faults together with
bringing the right data to the right person in the right time could increase the efficiency by
lowering the interpretation project lead times from months to weeks.
The increased use of 4D seismic has also been adding challenges both within data
management and tools for integration, rapid processing and efficient analysis.
- 23 -
Particularly efficient access to seismic pre-stack and/or field data is essential. The industry
could work together with the authorities in order to facilitate a more flexible release- and data
availability policy in conformance with today’s release policy imposed on well- and other
seismic data.
Future focus:

Improved Lithology and Fluid Prediction (LFP) using full elastic wave field
(inclding understanding/processing of 4C data and EM)

Depth processing for imaging of complex areas.

3D visualization techniques and user-friendly interpretation tool-kits.
4.2
Sedimentology and Stratigraphy
The identified gaps are mostly related to either improving the understanding of stratigraphy,
reservoirs, and source rock in under explored basins, or improving the heterogeneities within
reservoir models. Calibration of existing models is needed to reduce risk and promote
exploration activity. A detailed table of specific gaps can be found in the gap analysis located
in the appendices.
The future challenge besides process understanding is in the development of true 3D models
giving a definition of the paleotopography. Depositional modelling applications should take
the learning from development of 3D basin models into account and directly include
uncertainty handling routines in the code definition.
We need to move away from purely stochastic modeling tools as they do not provide
confidence in reservoir prediction and utilize the full knowledge of geologists. We need to
develop tools to handle the description of reservoir heterogeneities, combined with
geologically relevant upscaling to test the effects of merging heterogeneities at different
scales into a geological meaningful model.
Presently, 3D immersive visualization is primarily based on seismic data and their derivatives
(e.g., inversion, AVO), but inclusion of depositional models in these visualizations will add
additional insight in reservoir performance and drainage strategy.
- 24 -
Future focus:

Calibration in under-explored basins: Gathering data on stratigraphy, reservoir,
source rock and thermal history in immature areas will spur research activity, and
reduce exploration uncertainty.

High resolution reservoir characterization: Integration of high resolution 3D
sedimentological models into simulation will preserve detailed field heterogeneities
and increase our understanding of reservoir performance and increase ultimate field
recovery.
4.3
Structural Geology
At present our progress in understanding the structural evolution in complex or obscured areas
is limited by the quality of seismic data. Our focus in these areas should address the proper
acquisition and processing of high-resolution seismic data.
Predicting the reservoir performance in fractured reservoirs (e.g. chalk) is also still a
challenge in the industry. Integrated interpretation of data from drilling engineering, logging
and seismic is needed in order to close the gap in this area.
Improvements in seismic data volumes and interpretation tools will increase the accuracy of
structural/fault interpretation and reduce drilling and prospect risk. The integration of this
high-resolution data into geomodels and simulation models remains a challenge, and advances
in software handling are needed.
Future focus:


Behaviour of faults and fractures on reservoir performance: Development of an
integrated tool to handle fault seal analysis, drilling engineering, logging, and seismic
data.
Fractured reservoirs, improved image log interpretation: Derive fracture
permeability from image logs by integrating mud loss information from drilling
records.
- 25 -
4.4
Basin analysis: Source rocks, generation and migration
Exploration on the Norwegian Continental Shelf has resulted in a high quality data base of
information that is routinely used to interpret the movement of petroleum from source rocks
to traps. This works well in areas of dense well and seismic data but in ‘Frontier’ areas, like
the Arctic, Møre and Vøring Basins there is a great deal of uncertainty. Although, basins are
very different in character, it is remarkable that most of the conventional oil and gas in the
world is found in a narrow temperature range, between 60-120o C. Since world wide
commercial volumes exist in a variety of places, this implies that the processes cannot be very
sensitive to what we traditionally have considered to be important differences between the
basins.
Due to strong control of temperature on oil and gas accumulation in sedimentary basins there
is a need for more focus on the fundamental processes in the earths crust; better heat flow and
dynamic models, geodynamics and tectonic; i.e. processes that affect the temperature of a
basin.
Future focus:
4.5

Common factors in oil and gas fields: Use the excellent Norway database to

investigate what factors are common to individual oil and gas fields and extend to
a worldwide assessment.
Temperature evolution: Improved understanding of fundamental aspects
Rock Physics
Lithology and Fluid Predictions (LFP) from seismic data rely on good rock physical data.
Even though advances have been made, several key processes are poorly understood i.e. the
link between geological history and its effect on rock physics, and this hampers more reliable
interpretations. Unfortunately there are currently no national standards or database for rock
physical data.
Future focus:


Lithology and Fluid Prediction
Comprehensive database for rock physical data
- 26 -
4.6
Geomechanics
At present there is a lack of fully integrated geomechanics software for the oil industry and
the work flows/’best practices’ for interpretation are not well established. In high pressure
environments there is a higher risk that depletion will cause large changes in stress leading to
drilling challenges. Further research, better tools and integrated workflows for performing
geomechanical modelling of fields through time will make the results consistent and more
unique.
In order to investigate high pressure and temperature effects the laboratories have to develop
the capability to simulate the same extreme stress conditions that exist in nature.
Integration of recent advances in numerical simulation technology in reservoir modelling
workflows, could improve the application of geomechanics on full field models.
Future focus:
4.7

Integrated geomechanics ‘software/work flows’: Make the geomechanics
interpretation part of a truly integrated reservoir modelling work flow.

Develop a tool to directly measure pore pressure in shale (low permeability
rock): This would lead to better well designs by providing real instead of
predicted pressure data.
Reservoir Modelling and Simulation
An important challenge for further development of reservoir modelling methods is to improve
the connection between the geological understanding and the mathematical description used.
Process-based methods can be one way to achieve this.
Methods for handling integrated uncertainty in the modelling process should be improved.
A systematic approach for handling both uncertainties in data sources and in modelling
methods is needed. Uncertainty methods typically require generations of many alternative
models, and hence, faster methods for both static and dynamic modelling are required.
Many of the identified gaps are related to the ability to quickly integrate and visualize diverse
data types together so that realistic models can be used to optimise field production (e.g. 4D
seismic, geomechanical information and flow data).
- 27 -
Better methods for scale handling (e.g. upscaling) are important for data integration. This
involves identification of key parameters at various scales, combination of data defined at
various scales, and transfer of data from one scale to another.
Also important for data integration is seamless communication between software tools. Open
data standards should be further developed.
Despite a high level of sophistication, modern modelling methods cannot always condition to
all available data. Use of data from horizontal wells often creates problems for the modelling
methods, for instance stratigraphic data. Our understanding of how repeated seismic can be
used to predict changes over time in the reservoir is still immature, both for describing fluid
movements and for describing changes in reservoir properties. In general, the link between
dynamic modelling and static modelling should be strengthened, so that the static model can
be conditioned also to dynamic data.
Methods for analysis of the large amounts of data involved in reservoir modelling should be
improved. Further development of combined visualization of alternative data types is
important.
Future focus:




4D seismic and life of field seismic (LoFS): Both of these techniques are used to
track the movement of oil, gas and water through time. Research should be
conducted into new data analysis techniques that could confidently be used to
position fluids’ subsurface location or other changes in the field (e.g. compaction).
Integrated reservoir modelling and uncertainty management: Data integration
(e.g. static and dynamic) is a reoccurring theme throughout most Exploration and
Reservoir Characterization elements and must be considered a key area to improve
tools. There is no single software tool capable of providing a fully integrated
Reservoir Model all the way from Seismic, through Geo Model to Flow Model due
to problems with moving data, changing scales (upscaling) and common
standards/workflows. We need to solve the problem of utilizing all significant data
in work flows, also including probabilistic evaluation.
In field heterogeneities: Identify the key heterogeneities and develop a predictive
stochastic methodology to assess the effect on reservoir performance.
Horizontal well modelling: Solve the challenges that exist in modelling of
horizontal wells and the link between horizontal production/geology and the full
field model. We continue to struggle to model horizontal wells correctly and use
vertical dominated upscaling techniques.
- 28 -
5.
Recommendations
5.1
Recommended activities and focus areas.
In some instances the industry has been very slow to adopt new technology, and looking at the
current production profile it is obvious that this is one of the major challenges.
.
There is need for a step change in exploration with a clearer understanding of new knowledge
and technology needs and timing. A more collaborative approach to reducing product
development cycle time, sharing cost and results within the industry is needed.
There should be a strong focus on competence building and collaboration between companies,
contractors, research institutes and universities. Several technical areas lack adequate
educational focus at the universities, and it could in the future prove difficult to recruit
personnel in the areas of e.g. biostratigraphy, petrophysics. Norway has an opportunity to fill
these gaps and provide expertise on a worldwide basis. We recommend that the industry and
academia together develop a plan to identify future gaps and worldwide needs. This could be
a basis for a national strategy for focusing and employment issues within education and
research . One question is whether higher education is too focused on a single expertise rather
than combining two skills e g biostratigraphy and sedimentology or reservoir engineering and
petrophysics. This would also make the candidates more attractive to future employers.
It is recommended to reassess the existing funding structure for research initiatives, i.e.
industry supported, Force, OG21, Petromaks, Demo2000 etc.
- 29 -
The technological challenges in exploration and reservoir characterization are such that they
require a refocusing of the overall G&G based Force projects.
The various technical committees within Force have to work closer together as the integration
of the various disciplines will provide important input to solve the challenges.
In order to get projects better defined and suited for purpose a stronger collaboration is needed
between the oil companies (FORCE), the service industry and the academia. It is however a
big challenges to encourage the academia to be more active in the approach towards the oil
companies (e.g. FORCE) since it has been very hard to rise funding for projects the last years.
It is also a challenge for the authorities (MPE, NPD, RCN) to stimulate this cooperation by
working more actively to stimulate projects.
There is a big potential at the universities since development of new methods and technology
is often related to recruitment of candidates with up to date knowledge who are willing and
interested in demonstrating their skills in the industry. Recruitment of skilled people is key to
the future of this industry, and the universities are of major strategic importance here.
The Force web-site includes a comprehensive list and description of project proposals and
ongoing and completed projects. It is recommended that this list is sorted and expanded to
include all relevant petroleum related projects within academic institutions.
Based on the Inventory and Gap analysis that has taken place the following focus areas have
been identified:


Advances in seismic acquisition, process and workflows need continued progress to
provide better images in deep structurally complex and or obscured areas.
Depth migrated seismic as the new standard for interpretation (special attention on the
velocity model construction)
Improved Lithology and Fluid Prediction using full elastic wave field (4C, EM)

4D and Life of Field Seismic integration with rock physics.

Calibration of stratigraphy, reservoir, source rock and thermal history in underexplored basins.
Data integration is a reoccurring team throughout most Exploration and Reservoir
Characterization elements and must be considered a key area to improve tools
Improve integration of real time (4D) and dynamic data to facilitate reservoir
management.



- 30 -




Integrated Geomechanics software and work flows are needed as part of an integrated
reservoir modeling work flow.
Improved modelling and simulation of reservoir heterogeneities with focus on the
behaviour of fault and fractures on reservoir performance. Development of an
integrated tool to handle fault seal analysis, fracture analysis, drilling engineering,
logging, and seismic data.
Development of industry standards for additional datatypes and maintenance of highquality databases and data handling.
There should be a strong focus on knowledge creation, competence building and
collaboration between companies, contractors and academia. Some strategic
recommendations about the research and educational activities at the universities
should be made to avoid misunderstanding related to industry needs
It is important to differentiate between development of methodology (mathematical and
statistical formulations) and technology (computer power etc).
Focus should be kept on obtaining new knowledge, encouraging creative thinking, subsurface
understanding and ability to reformulate and identify new problems.
5.2
Recommended projects
The gaps suggested in this report are suggested as the basis for further discussions and
generation of project proposals.
A stratigraphic well through basalt
It is recommended to perform a feasibility study and evaluation of the possible benefits of a
stratigraphic well through the basalt area in the Vøring and /or Møre Basin to gather data,
promote research and stimulate exploration activity.
The western offshore areas of Mid-Norway are covered by basalt rocks. The physical nature
of these rocks means that it is almost impossible produce seismic images of the sediments that
lie beneath them. This has blocked oil exploration drilling in these basalt areas as there has so
far been no possibility to identify oil bearing strata. However, it seems likely that a similar oil
province to Haltenbanken could lie beneath these basalts.
- 31 -
The (se) research well(s) could be used as natural laboratories being studied by academia and
industry in a joined effort.
Close cooperation between institutes would provide a stimulating environment for advanced
research within G&G fields lacking muscle, e.g. stratigraphy.
A wealth of information pertaining to rock physics, sedimentology, heat flow etc could be
gathered.
NPD play models in the Norwegian Sea. Basalt flows in the west are indicated by ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ .
- 32 -
4C Consortium (4CC)
In order to get the focus on technology for processing of 4C data it is recommended to form a
consortium that can systematically gather field data from most of the 4C surveys that have
been acquired on the NCS. Time is running out for major fields in Norway, and 4C seismic
will have a potential for both improved reservoir characterization and more accurate 4D
monitoring. Data should be preprocessed and made publically available for Universities and
research institutions as well as the industry.
Research project database.
The establishment of a database of ongoing projects at universities and research institutes is
needed to increase knowledge sharing and reduce redundancy. A survey of the petroleum
relevant activities at the Universities resulting in a catalog of projects and personnel should be
compiled.
Higher education strategy.
Norwegian academias cover a broad spectrum of disciplines important for both exploration
and reservoir characterization. Selected areas within education and research relevant to the
petroleum industry should be improved, in order to have access to qualified personnel in the
future. These areas include biostratigraphy, structural geology, fault-seal analysis and
petrophysics. It is however a question whether Norway should prioritize these areas as long as
the expertise exists abroad (structural geology, fault-seal analysis). Some of these areas are
however lacking worldwide expertise, and Norway has an opportunity to fill these gaps in
areas like biostratigraphy and petrophysics.
- 33 -
Appendix: Technology Gaps – Tables
The items in these tables are not prioritized. This could be the theme for future work groups
of specialists within the selected areas.
Geophysics - Seismic Data Acquisition Gaps
Seismic Data Acquisition
Technology Gap
Remarks
Improved illumination in complex
This can be achieved by multi-azimuth acquisition,
areas.
sea floor recording, long streamers and may include
use of several vessels simultaneously.
Acquisition of shear wave data.
Development of shear wave sources
and more cost effective recording
systems.
Ocean bottom seismic (4C) can help in seeing
through gas chimneys, basalt flows, verifying
DHI’s and improve definition of stratigraphic traps.
Optimize ocean bottom equipment
for LoFS (deployment, stability,
cost)
Permanent sea floor installations to record seismic
data whenever required may become ‘the norm’ for
new field developments in Norway and worldwide.
High resolution seismic and
This is mainly a challenge for the service industry.
accurate positioning and increased
repeatability for 4D surveys in
order to be able to detect smaller
changes in the state of reservoir
fluids.
High Density 3D and Q are trademarks for
acquisition of 3D seismic with short streamer
spacing and dense sampling.
Over/under streamers with accurate
depth control and positioning.
This method has potential both for increased
bandwith and multiple removals.
VSP technology with in-well
equipment
Including 4D-VSP’s surveys / 4D tomography
(down hole receivers in several wells )
- 34 -
Geophysics - Seismic Processing and Modelling Gaps
Seismic Processing and Modelling
Remarks
Technology Gap
Depth processing for imaging of
In order to be able to image complex areas it is necessary
complex areas.
to convert from time to depth as soon as possible.
Complex areas may be areas with gas chimneys,
anisotropy, lava flows, salt domes or complex overburden
(including water bottom topography).
Removal of complex multiples
In many deep water areas in Norway seismic data quality
is seriously degraded by defracted multiples which are
difficult to remove with available techniques.
Tomographic velocity estimation of
Current velocity estimation techniques result in excessive
multi-azimuth converted wave data
variability between azimuths.
Lithology and Fluid Prediction.
In order to reduce the risk of dry wells there is a need to
improve methods for detecting lithology/rock properties
and discriminate between liquids/hydrocarbon types (incl
gas-hydrates) and evaluating Direct Hydrocarbon
Indicators (DHI). This involves use of longer offsets
(AVO, tomography), multi-component seismic and EM
technology.
Full Wave Modelling
Including anisotropy and shear waves
Improved resolution, improved signal
This is a general problem in large areas on the NCS.
to noise ratio and multiple removal.
Processing and interpretation systems
Reliable usage of 4C data needs further development in
for 4C – data.
processing- and interpretation techniques.
Sea bed logging. Improved processing
Electro-Magnetic (EM) recording is an emerging
algorithms for removal of air-waves.
technology that can give valuable information together
Improved inversion and integration
with more traditional seismic
techniques
Seismic interference noise removal
Establish industry acceptable criteria for avoiding time
sharing by more efficient noise attenuation/removal
Improve the quality of regional
velocity data for depth conversion and
pressure prediction
Long offset
Higher order NMO; refraction changes (incl 4D).
- 35 -
Geophysics - Seismic Interpretation Gaps
Seismic Interpretation
Technology Gap
Remarks
Data Management and Integration:
Getting the right data to the right
person/process at the right time.
There are very large savings in project time and cost
if the dataflow can be smoothed (2-300% savings
potential). Modern technology and experiences from
other industries and projects could play a significant
role here.
Access to and tools for
interpretation of pre-stack data.
Integration of information. 3D
visualization techniques and userfriendly interpretation tool-kits are
necessary.
Tools are needed for immediate
update of the reservoir model based
on integrated use of dynamic data.
Integration of the large amounts of data together with
a wide spectrum of applications (geophysics, geology
and reservoir technology) represents an area where
Norwegian systems have had success, but there is
still a long way to go in order to give the
geoscientists an optimal fully integrated working
platform.
Interpretive processing.
More processing technologies should be made
available for the interpreters through user friendly
options on the workstations (AVO, modelling,
velocity analysis/diagnostics etc )
Automatic interpretation/tracking
and pattern recognition
Horizons and faults
Classification/Cluster analysis
Automatic Extraction and handling
of Sequence Stratigraphy
Handling large 3D & 4D volumes
on standard HW/SW platforms
PCs
Techniques tools and practices for
DM of large reservoir model output
Proliferation of very large models but DM practices
have not kept pace.
Real time, time domain production
data.
Reservoir characterization is requiring integration of
additional amounts of production data
- 36 -
Sedimentology and Stratigraphy Gaps
The strategic focus in exploration is related to reducing the uncertainty in under-explored
basins and promoting exploration through the reduction of critical risk elements. In Reservoir
Characterization our focus is related to data management, and high-resolution models that
capture the heterogeneities we see in our reservoirs.
Sedimentology and Stratigraphy
Technology Gap
Remarks
Improve the understanding of the
sedimentology, stratigraphy and
thermal history of the Atlantic
Margin sub-basalt play
Uncalibrated stratigraphy, reservoirs, source rock,
and thermal history have resulted in unacceptable
risk levels for the industry. In order to attract
exploration activity the play risk and potential
needs to be calibrated?
Improve the understanding of the
stratigraphy, reservoir and source
rock of the Møre and Vøring Basins.
Poor exploration results in the Møre and Vøring
Basins along with limited well calibration have
resulted in large uncertainties in the prediction of
reservoir presence. Play fairway models need
additional calibration points to improve the models
and change exploration success.
Develop and maintain a high quality
rock properties database
Rock property data is essential for improving our
ability to predict reservoir and fluids response in
the subsurface.
We need to move away from purely
stochastic modeling tools as they do
not provide confidence in reservoir
prediction and utilize the knowledge
of geologists
We need to develop tools to handle the description
of reservoir heterogeneities, combined with
geologically relevant upscaling to test the effects of
merging heterogeneities at different scales into a
geological meaningful model.
Age dating of rocks: Maintain
biostratigraphy expertise.
There is a risk that expert
professionals in biostratigraphy are
no longer being trained.
Age dating rocks (biostratigraphy) is a fundamental
science used to support the oil business.
- 37 -
Structural Geology Gaps
The Norwegian industry has recently seen an increase in the acquisition of long offset 2D and 3D
seismic data in an attempt to provide better resolution of deep reservoirs below the Base Cretaceous
Unconformity. Successful quality data acquisition could reduce the exploration risk in these deep
reservoirs.
Fractured reservoir characterization is still a challenge in the industry. Despite advances in logging
technology and geologic characterization the primary challenge is how to convert the fracture
characterization information into an accurate prediction of reservoir performance of fractured
reservoirs. Integration of data and modelling of data from drilling engineering to seismic is needed in
order to close the gap in this area.
Structural Geology
Remarks
Technology Gap
Develop database and tools to evaluate
The industry lacks the ability to describe and model the
the behaviour of fractures and faults in
impact of faults in geomodeling software
Chalk reservoirs.
Further development of modelling and
There remains a lot of research and development to be
simulation tools for improved
done before such tools can be considered part of the
understanding and management of
general workflow.
fractured reservoirs (e.g. Discrete Fracture
Network Modeling Tools like FRED and
FRACA, or the new generation CVFE
hybrid reservoir simulators like CSP)...
Accurate prediction of fracture
The development of integrated workflows between
permeability from image log data
micro-mud losses and image logs to better predict
reservoir deliverability from fractures. This work will
include laboratory work and numerical modelling
typical of the micro-loss events. It will include the
geology of the formation, fracture description, drilling
mud and fracture plugging particle characteristics and
deformation of the fracture penetrated by the fluid and
additives. Based on this work one should be able to
develop a method for better predicting fractured
reservoir performance response.
Acquisition of high resolution gravity data
The gravity data in combination with other data can
in combination with 3D seismic surveys
reduce the uncertainty on the structural evolution
As exploration and field developments
As computing power is continuing to increase it is
- 38 -
move deeper the seismic quality will be
necessary to evaluate new technologies that in the past
reduced. In fact very poor seismic images
were impossible to apply due to computer time
in some areas can be expected. Currently
limitations. One technology that has emerged is
very few methods other than seismic are
integrating finite elements in strain reconstruction and
used to map structures at depth. With poor
forward modelling. These models can be used to
seismic the uncertainty and risk increases
predict location of faults and small scale fracturing, as
for both exploration and development of
well as predicting the stress state. The predictions can
these fields. Other methods than seismic
be compared with typical data collected from wells and
that can be tied to well observations will
used to verify or disprove reservoir predictions in poor
be useful.
seismic areas.
Basin analysis: Source rocks, generation and migration Gaps
The petroleum industry in Norway has an outstanding database that defines the physical
conditions of petroleum occurrences and the basins (e.g. pressure, temperature, oil and source
rock maturity). There is, therefore, an opportunity to further use this database for research to
understand petroleum systems and seek to apply this knowledge to less well known ‘frontier’
areas in Norway and worldwide.
In addition there is a need for more focus on the fundamental processes in the earths crust to
create better models to emulate the processes that affect the temperature of a basin (e.g. heat
flow, fluid flow, tectonics).
- 39 -
Bain Analysis Technology Gap
Remarks
Petroleum systems for the Norway oil
and gas fields is typically analysed by
attempting for follow the hydrocarbon
generation and migration from the
source rock to the trap (reservoir).
Most fields are treated independently
and little focus has been placed on
Norway has an excellent database for
investigating common factors in fields. Pressure,
depth and temperature conditions through time
are obvious examples of data that can be
researched. The aim of this would be an
unconventional approach to the problem by
addressing it by looking at the end result, rather
trying to identify what are common
factors in the oil and gas occurrences.
than trying to understand a complex system of
petroleum, generation, migration and trapping.
The research resulting in the distribution pattern
of oil and gas between 60 – 120 degrees is such a
result. The end result of such investigations
should be a much better understanding of risk
from undrilled structures both in Norway and
worldwide.
Petroleum systems in ‘Frontier’ basins
By combining structural and sedimentation
in Norway are less well understood
due primarily to the small amount of
wells drilled. Temperature, heat flow
and pressure conditions are not well
established for these basins and even
the existence of source rocks is
questionable in some areas. There is a
growing need to include the latest well
data into regional analyses.
history together with crustal heat flow
interpretations it will be possible to interpret the
distribution of source rocks in ‘Frontier’ basins
and create a temperature/pressure model through
time. The aim will be to have a basin analysis
that will indicate where in the basin petroleum is
most likely to occur present day.
- 40 -
Rock Physics Gaps
Integrated subsurface rock physics
model: Technology Gap
Remarks
Currently the standard workflows in
the industry are based on separate
models used for geomechanics,
geology, fluid flow and geophysics.
In complex fractured reservoirs to the goal
should be to integrate the traditional separate
modelling workflows into a truly integrated
workflow based on first order principals for the
Most of the integration that takes place
is the integration of results from
individual workflows. In order to
integrate data from the various
disciplines one usually has to simplify
the individual models. The standard
industry approach has been to upscale
geologic models in order to be able to
handle more simplified fluid flow
reservoir performance models. The
problem at hand. This workflow should also
include production induced stress changes and
consequences like micro-seismicity. The
theoretical framework for doing this is emerging
and computer methods, solvers and hardware as
well. The concept is that one can generate more
unique solutions if all the physics were
combined in one model. This will require the
development of a truly integrated subsurface
rock physics model, which as an example also
approach has been to simplify the
model as much as one can without
simplifying it too much. A delicate
balancing act that in some cases for
complex reservoirs is extremely
difficult.
could be used to forecast micro-seismic activity
in a field as well as production of oil and gas.
Rock properties prediction from
seismic
Elastical properties, density, viscosity and pore
pressure prediction
- 41 -
Geomechanics Gaps
The Norwegian industry is already searching for, and developing oil and gas in the under
explored deeper areas of basins (e.g. Kristin Field). At these depths the seismic is often of
poor quality making mapping of accumulations and assessment of compartmentalisation of
the reservoirs challenging. Due to the high pore pressure and temperature the rocks will
typically deform in a very ductile manner as the effective stresses are increased during
depletion. This requires technologies to assist in identifying areas to drill and in determining if
it is even practical, safe or possible to drill a well because of the pressure and temperature
conditions.
Geomechanics
Technology Gap
Remarks
Pressure prediction at depth in low
permeability formations for well
design and exploration. There exists
no method for directly measuring pore
pressure in low permeability rocks.
Reduce uncertainties by direct measurements of
pore pressure in low permeability (shale) rocks.
Develop tools and methodology for measuring
pore pressure in shale directly (work is ongoing to
kick off a JIP on this in Norway). These tools will
The pore pressures are estimated from
indirect methods from logs and
seismic, even after wells have been
drilled. The uncertainties in the
predicted pressures directly impact
well design, risk and cost.
be made in order to instrument the first wells
drilled into the area so that time can be used to get
a good quality measurement of the pore pressure in
the low permeable formations. One can also
evaluate more openhole short term methods based
on a comparison to the long term measurements.
Basin models etc. can then be calibrated to these
data points in order to better understand the area
for exploration. Well design can also then be based
on measured data and not predicted.
- 42 -
Reservoir Modelling and Simulation Gaps
Improved oil recovery to extend the production lifetime will be a main focus area as the
Norwegian fields reach maturity. Many of the identified gaps are related to the ability to
quickly integrate and visualize diverse data types together so that realistic models can be used
to optimise future field production (e.g. 4D seismic, geomechanical information and flow
data).
Modelling technology has the following needs:
 Faster model building







More accurate
Constrained on more information types such as
o Production history,
o 3D and 4D seismic,
o Logdata, plugdata, swc’s, pvt-data, etc
Improved data integration
o realistic 3D distribution – maybe with introducing more “depositional process”
related modelling algorithms
Repeatability of workflows
Documentation of workflow in the applications
Faster updates by smart workflow managers
More “accurate” risking by fast construction and management of scenarios through a
workflow manager.
Reservoir Modelling and Simulation:
Remarks
Technology Gap
The integrated reservoir modeling tools,
We need to solve the problem of utilizing all
i.e. software we have today are not
significant data in work flows, also including
capable of providing a fully integrated
probabilistic evaluation.
Reservoir Model all the way from
seismic, through geo model to flow
model.
Enhanced Oil Recovery: tracking the
Different techniques are being used for EOR
movement of oil, gas and water through
(enhanced oil recovery) on mature fields in the North
the field’s lifetime.
Sea. In connection with EOR a need for surveillance
and 4D seismic have evolved. Utilizing these data for
Managing large data flows quickly,
fluid monitoring and improving the reservoir
- 43 -
quantify for an improved long term
description will be a major challenge in future
depletion strategy.
Reservoir management.
Modelling the history of oil and gas
Many Fields have a long depletion and injection
production in fields involves large amount
history and a large amount of dynamic and static
of data and several ‘tools’ to interpret
data. A major challenge in reservoir modelling work
data. In today’s environment much more
is to integrate and utilize all significant data in
data is generated than can be successfully
effective workflows.
‘integrated’ and interpreted with current
Methods are needed to efficiently handle alternative
systems. There is a need for solutions that
geological models and to allow a probabilistic
can bridge the gap between different 2D
evaluation of the combined uncertainties.
and 3D applications in terms of
resolution, gridding algorithms and
upscaling routines. In addition there is a
need to manage uncertainty and flexibility
in the History Matching process.
Develop technology to improve
Current upscaling in Reservoir Characterization tools
processing capacity and speed of
eliminates details from the geomodels
simulators.account of these.
Improve techniques for implementing and
Improved seismic imaging (AVO, Shear Wave
testing the effect of hetero-geneities on
splitting, 4D) and good analogue data bases have
flow and depletion. All fields have
allowed for detailed geologic models with
heterogeneities. These are often faults that
heterogeneities (faults, fractures, stylolites, facies etc)
act as barriers to oil or gas flow, but can
being built.
also conduits of better flow. Such features
It is not straightforward to define which of these
are often at too small a scale to include in
actually impact the flow performance. In addition it
computer models directly so there is no
is a challenge to represent heterogeneities
perfect methodology to take account of
realistically in flow simulators.
these.
Improved understanding of low-
Special attention on wettability and ways of
permeability reservoirs.
improving this in low-K reservoirs (clastic, chalk etc)
Pin pointing the oil water contact is not
Pore pressure, porosity and permeability are
always simple in fields where reservoir
considered to control the contact in most fields.
quality is poor.
However in certain low permeability fields the oil
Relationship between reservoir quality,
water contact seems to be strongly influenced by rock
deformation and saturation needs to be
quality, chemistry, timing of migration and structural
better understood.
development. Understanding these relationships
better could reduce the risk when considering high
risk targets in mature fields.
- 44 -
- 45 -