2020
DOI: 10.3390/geosciences10080299
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Seismic Reflection Methods in Offshore Groundwater Research

Abstract: There is growing evidence that passive margin sediments in offshore settings host large volumes of fresh and brackish water of meteoric origin in submarine sub-surface reservoirs. Marine geophysical methods, in particular seismic reflection data, can help characterize offshore hydrogeological systems and yet the existing global database of industrial basin wide surveys remains untapped in this context. In this paper we highlight the importance of these data in groundwater exploration, by reviewing existing stu… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
16
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

2
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 17 publications
(25 citation statements)
references
References 128 publications
(226 reference statements)
0
16
0
Order By: Relevance
“…As highlighted in section 2.3.1, the present-day distribution and flow of groundwater in the offshore domain relates closely to the geological heterogeneity across a continental margin. Seismic reflection data analysis can provide indirect constraints on the main factors controlling this heterogeneity-from the lithology and permeability of the sediments, to the geometry of depositional units and faults (Bertoni et al, 2020)-as well as image bottom-simulating reflectors, which allow detection of hydrate and thus indicate if pore water freshening associated to hydrate dissociation is feasible (Berndt et al, 2004). Seismic and sequence stratigraphy (Mitchum et al, 1977;Vail et al, 1977) have traditionally been used to identify the type of depositional environment and provide insights into the changes in sea level in a basin through time and the palaeogeographic evolution of a sedimentary margin (Miller et al, 1998;Mitchum et al, 1977;Zecchin & Catuneanu, 2015).…”
Section: Reflection Seismic Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…As highlighted in section 2.3.1, the present-day distribution and flow of groundwater in the offshore domain relates closely to the geological heterogeneity across a continental margin. Seismic reflection data analysis can provide indirect constraints on the main factors controlling this heterogeneity-from the lithology and permeability of the sediments, to the geometry of depositional units and faults (Bertoni et al, 2020)-as well as image bottom-simulating reflectors, which allow detection of hydrate and thus indicate if pore water freshening associated to hydrate dissociation is feasible (Berndt et al, 2004). Seismic and sequence stratigraphy (Mitchum et al, 1977;Vail et al, 1977) have traditionally been used to identify the type of depositional environment and provide insights into the changes in sea level in a basin through time and the palaeogeographic evolution of a sedimentary margin (Miller et al, 1998;Mitchum et al, 1977;Zecchin & Catuneanu, 2015).…”
Section: Reflection Seismic Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Large-scale groundwater systems are slow to adapt to rapid sea level changes (Edmunds & Milne, 2001). As sea level rose after the Last Glacial Maximum, seawater overtopped OFG bodies because the landward migration of the freshwater-seawater interface was slower (<10 km per 10 ka) than the sea level rise Bertoni et al, 2020). Sequence stratigraphic surfaces, facies contacts, and systems tracts for a (a) siliciclastic shelf setting (modified from Zecchin & Catuneanu, 2013), overlying a deeper carbonate basement, and (b) carbonate margin (modified from Razin et al, 2010).…”
Section: Hydrological Factorsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Therefore, integrative analyses of CSEM with multi-channel seismic (MCS) reflection data (e.g. Bertoni et al 2020) have proven effective in differentiating lithological units from pore fluid salinity anomalies in siliciclastic margins (e.g. Gustafson et al, 2019).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We compared our OFG estimates with several regional scale studies (Amir et al, 2013;Bakari et al, 2012;Bertoni et al, 2020;Engelen et al, 2019;Geldern et al, 2013;Gustafson et al, 2019;Haroon et al, 2018;Jiao et al, 2015;Knight et al, 2019;Larsen et al, 2017;Oteri, 1988;Paleologos et al, 2018;Pauw et al, 2014;Person et al, 2012Person et al, , 2003Thomas et al, 2019;Varma and Michael, 2011;Zhang et al, 2011) and a set of offshore observation wells (Micallef, 2020) limited to areas with unconsolidated sediments, see Figure 4-2. Unfortunately, the majority of these regional scale studies do not provide volume estimates.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%