Hydraulic Stimulation and Geophysical Fracture Monitoring in the - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶

$hydraulic stimulation and geophysical fracture monitoring$

Dec 02, 2022 295 likes •488 views

Hydraulic Stimulation and Geophysical Fracture Monitoring in the -Project J. Orzol (1) , R. Jung (1) , H. Buness (1) , T. Tischner (2) , R. Jatho (2) and P. Kehrer (2) (1): GGA-Institute, Hannover; (2): BGR, Hannover Objective supply

SLIDE 1

Hydraulic Stimulation and Geophysical Fracture Monitoring in the

Project
J. Orzol(1), R. Jung(1), H. Buness(1), T. Tischner(2), R. Jatho(2)

and P. Kehrer(2) (1): GGA-Institute, Hannover; (2): BGR, Hannover

SLIDE 2

Objective

thermal power: 2 MW flowrate: 25 m3/h temperature: 130 °C costs: 7.5 Mio €

supply geothermal

heat for direct use

use one-well concepts

SLIDE 3

GeneSys

sedimentary rocks
low porosity & permeability
create artificial geothermal systems (EGS)
transfer waterfrac technology to sediments
Is there a self propping mechanism for

sediments?

fracture propagation in layered sediments?
….

SLIDE 4

Stimulation operations

27-Oct 28-Oct 29-Oct 30-Oct 31-Oct 1-Nov 2-Nov 3-Nov 100 200 300 400 injection pressure at wellhead (bar) 40 80 120 injection rate (l/s)

Injection of 20.000 m³ fresh water
Creation of a large fracture with high conductivity

50 l/s ≈ 330 bar

SLIDE 5

Phillips et al. 2002

SLIDE 6

900 m 1800 m Dreilingen Z1 Horstberg Z1 10 PDAS (6-Kanal) 9 EDL (3-Kanal)

3 - component 4,5 Hz geophone

SLIDE 7

Foto: S. Baisch

charges (each 30 g)

use seismic signals from perforator guns to:

calibrate velocity model
estimate detection level

(seismic efficiency only vaguely known)

M ~ 0. to -0.5

(comparable to Soultz)

SLIDE 8

1 3 7 number of events:

Induced seismicity – temporal occurence

~ 8600 m3

wellhead pressure (bar) flow rate (l/s)

SLIDE 9

6-Nov 7-Nov 8-Nov 9-Nov 10-Nov 11-Nov 12-Nov 13-Nov 100 200 300 400 Injektionsdruck (bar) 20 40 60 80 100 Injektionsrate (l/s)

Second Stimulation

Not a single event!

SLIDE 10

Seismic Event 1.11., 13:24:29. EDL - stations, all components, bandpass 30 – 90 Hz. Seismic Event 1.11., 13:13:11. all stations, z-component

Event 13:13:11 / 13:24:29

Q-con

SLIDE 11

Phillips et al. 2002

SLIDE 12

Mohr Circle

200 400 600 800 1000 1200 400 800 1200

Horstberg Soultz Normal stress (bar) Shear stress (bar) µ=1 µ=0,85

SLIDE 13

geophones tilmeter self-potential

1 km

Horstberg Z1 Dreilingen Z1

Self-potential & tiltmeter

…no clear correlation to hydraulic activities…

SLIDE 14

5 µrad ~ 5 µm/m

22.10. 24.10. 26.10. 28.10. 30.10. 1.11. 3.11. 5.11. 7.11. 9.11. 11.11. 13.11. 15.11. 17.11. 19.11. 21.11. 23.11. 25.11. 27.11. 29.11. 1.12. 3.12. 5.12. 7.12.

Y - component X - component N1

tides

N4 N3 N2

22.10. 24.10. 26.10. 28.10. 30.10. 1.11. 3.11. 5.11. 7.11. 9.11. 11.11. 13.11. 15.11. 17.11. 19.11. 21.11. 23.11. 25.11. 27.11. 29.11. 1.12. 3.12. 5.12. 7.12.

Tiltmeter

stimulations

Okt. | Nov.
Nov. | Dez.
Okt. | Nov.
Nov. | Dez.

SLIDE 15

utlook
F. Böker, 1994
demonstration project

Hannover

3.800 m deep well
massive waterfrac-tests
installation of a micro-

seismic network in preparation

SLIDE 16

Conclusions/Summary

propagtion of a large tensile fracture by injection of

20.000 m³ of fresh water

only very few events detected
Soultz-like events did not occur
low stress difference between Sh and Sv:

presumably no shearing, tensile fracture

potentially numerous smaller events not detected
deeper observation wells desirable, but too costly
more experience from Hannover site 2007/2008

SLIDE 17

SLIDE 18

130 140 150 160 Temperatur (°C) 4000 3900 3800 3700 3600 3500 Teufe (m)

24.9.03, ungestört

Estimate of fracture height

≈ 200 m !

Solling-Sdst. Detfurth-Sdst.

fracture clearly

propagates through clay stones

vertical fracture

extension approx. 200 m

temperature (°C) depth (m)