Bayesian inversion of time‐lapse seismic data for the estimation of static reservoir properties and dynamic property changes
ABSTRACT Seismic conditioning of static reservoir model properties such as porosity and lithology has traditionally been faced as a solution of an inverse problem. Dynamic reservoir model properties have been constrained by time‐lapse seismic data. Here, we propose a methodology to jointly estimate...
| Published in: | Geophysical Prospecting |
|---|---|
| Main Authors: | , |
| Format: | Article in Journal/Newspaper |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Wiley
2014
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1365-2478.12203 https://api.wiley.com/onlinelibrary/tdm/v1/articles/10.1111%2F1365-2478.12203 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/1365-2478.12203 |
| Summary: | ABSTRACT Seismic conditioning of static reservoir model properties such as porosity and lithology has traditionally been faced as a solution of an inverse problem. Dynamic reservoir model properties have been constrained by time‐lapse seismic data. Here, we propose a methodology to jointly estimate rock properties (such as porosity) and dynamic property changes (such as pressure and saturation changes) from time‐lapse seismic data. The methodology is based on a full Bayesian approach to seismic inversion and can be divided into two steps. First we estimate the conditional probability of elastic properties and their relative changes; then we estimate the posterior probability of rock properties and dynamic property changes. We apply the proposed methodology to a synthetic reservoir study where we have created a synthetic seismic survey for a real dynamic reservoir model including pre‐production and production scenarios. The final result is a set of point‐wise probability distributions that allow us to predict the most probable reservoir models at each time step and to evaluate the associated uncertainty. Finally we also show an application to real field data from the Norwegian Sea, where we estimate changes in gas saturation and pressure from time‐lapse seismic amplitude differences. The inverted results show the hydrocarbon displacement at the times of two repeated seismic surveys. |
|---|