Spe 37532 Pa
Spe 37532 Pa
Spe 37532 Pa
Petroleum Reservoirs
Michael Wilt* and Clifford Schenkel, Lawrence Livermore Natl. Laboratory; Tom Daley, John Peterson, and Ernest
Majer, Lawrence Berkeley Natl. Laboratory; A.S. Murer,** Mobil E&P U.S.; R.M. Johnston,** SPE, CalResources LLC;
and Louis Klonsky, Chevron U.S.A. Production Co.
Original SPE manuscript received for review 15 January 1997. Revised manuscript received Field Experiments
14 August 1997. Paper peer approved 2 September 1997. Paper (SPE 37532) first presented
at the 1997 SPE International Thermal Operations and Heavy Oil Symposium held in Bakers-
Seismic and EM field projects were initiated as early as 1994 and
field, Californina, 10–12 February. continue in four separate field areas. Most projects are in early to in-
termediate stages of completion, but several have just begun sec- Three crosshole seismic surveys were completed: one immediately
ondary operations. The following sections provide selected high- after the onset of steam in June 1995, the second in August 1995, and
lights from some of these. the third in February 1996. The initial survey included passive seis-
mic monitoring during hydrofracturing. The results of this monitor-
Seismic Measurements at the CalResources Pilot, South Belridge ing showed no observable activity. The lack of microseismicity was
Field. CalResources currently is applying a high-energy steamdrive surprising in light of the high seismicity observed earlier in a different
for oil recovery in diatomite reservoirs at the South Belridge field. part of the field during steam injection. Seismic monitoring at two
This pilot is the third in a series to study the steam-flow mechanism subsequent hydrofractures with Chevron at Lost Hills (August 1996
and May 1997), however, did show seismicity associated with hydro-
in this very tight rock. Previous results were generally encouraging
fracturing in the Opal A section of the reservoir.
for enhanced oil production, but there was evidence of steam bypass
Initial crosshole measurements showed strong attenuation of the P-
and breakthrough into intervals outside the targeted injection zone. wave phase despite good energy in later arriving S waves. The weak
Well drilling for the third pilot began in April 1995. The new wells P-wave energy was quite surprising in view of strong P-wave energy
included two fiberglass and two steel-cased observation wells in addi- during crosshole surveys at Mobil leases within the same field. A fol-
tion to the injection and production wells in the 5/8-acre pilot. Because low-up survey 2 months later showed similar results [that is, weak P-
of unexpectedly encountering a hot zone within the overlying Tulare wave energy but strong S waves (Fig. 2a)]. The third survey, made
sands, both fiberglass wells were lost almost immediately after drill- 6 months after the steam injection had begun, had dramatically differ-
ing. We were therefore unable to collect EM data for this site. ent results. In this case, the P waves are noticeably stronger over
(a) (b)
Fig. 2—Crosshole seismic recordings after initiation of a steamflood at the South Belridge field in July 1995; common offset gather from
Wells L06 (source) and L07 (sensor). (a) Data from the August 1995 survey showing highly attenuated P-wave phase and strong S-wave
energy. (b) Data from February 1996 showing large increases in P-wave energy. Change is believed to be related to a decrease in gas
saturation caused by reservoir pressurization.