Using Microseismicity to Estimate Formation Permeability for Geological Storage of CO₂

Abstract

We investigate two approaches for estimating formation permeability based on microseismic data. The two approaches differ in terms of the mechanism that triggers the seismicity: pore-pressure triggering mechanism and the so-called seepage-force (or effective stress) triggering mechanism. Based on microseismic data from a hydraulic fracture experiment using water and supercritical CO 2 injection, we estimate permeability using the two different approaches. The microseismic data comes from two hydraulic stimulation treatments that were performed on two formation intervals having similar geological, geomechanical, and in situ stress conditions, yet different injection fluid was used. Both approaches (pore-pressure triggering, and the seepage-force triggering) provide estimates of permeability within the same order of magnitude. However, the seepage-force mechanism (i.e., effective stress perturbation) provides more consistent estimates of permeability between the two different injection fluids. The results show that permeability estimates using microseismic monitoring have strong potential to constrain formation permeability limitations for large-scale CO 2 injection.

Comparing the Hydrodynamic Response of Fracture Shearing in Marcellus and Eau Claire Shales

“…Shearing along fractures, where displacement occurs between complementary, rough walls of a fracture plane, can also occur as a result of the induced seismicity associated with many human activities in the energy and carbon capture sectors (Jackson et al, 2014;Majer et al, 2012;Myer and Daley, 2011;Zoback, 2012;Zoback and Gorelick, 2012). Hydraulic fracturing operations, in particular, produce many micro-seismic events that may be used to monitor the extent of the stimulated reservoir (Angus and Verdon, 2013). There is a complex relationship between in-situ stresses, changes introduced by shearing along fractures, and fracture flow properties.…”