40 likes | 176 Vues
The microseismic monitoring industry has seen over $200 million spent on monitoring more than 100,000 hydraulic fracture stages globally, yet notable inefficiencies and a lack of data standards persist. With regulatory bodies becoming increasingly involved, the sector faces challenges like lost data and confusion due to ad-hoc attempts to fill gaps. This presentation discusses ongoing standardization initiatives, including the CSEG guidelines, Energistics data types, and SEG user group efforts, aimed at developing an effective microseismic strategy while promoting consistency and reliability in data handling.
E N D
Microseismic Data Standards or Non-standards!! Shawn Maxwell
Microseismic Monitoring Business ~$200M spent on hydraulic fracture monitoring ~100,000+ frac stages monitored around the globe (~5% of fracs) Rapidly expanding with new vendors, clients and academics Regulatory bodies are increasing involved There are no current microseismic data standards Inefficiencies Loss of data Confusion Ad hoc attempts to fill the gaps
“Ad Hoc” Microseismic Standardization Initiatives • CSEG “Guidelines” • Data types: archiving and trading • www.cseg.ca/cgf • Energistics attributes xml • http://www.energistics.org • “SEG-2M” User Group • Microseismic friendly headers Continuous: SEGD SEGY SEG2 Events: SEGY SEG2 CSEG Guidelines Requirements Trace SEG Standard Attributes Energistics
Request • SEG Technical Standards develop a microseismic strategy • Attributes? Energistics? • Trace Data • Support SEG2M?