Layer | Fill | Outline |
---|
Map layers
Theme | Visible | Selectable | Appearance | Zoom Range (now: 0) |
---|
Fill | Stroke |
---|---|
Collaborating Authors
The following perspective was presented for discussion at Rockstore ''80. It is intended to address, in very general terms, the following three questions:Upon what experience can we base geological investigations for subsurface nuclear waste isolation facilities? What are the additional requirements to be met, for which our previous experience must be extended? What approaches can be adopted to meet these new requirements? INTRODUCTORY COMMENTS Geological characterisations provide input to all the subsequent phases of repository development, including performance assessment. Consequently, the quality and accuracy of safety assessments can directly reflect the quality and accuracy of geological characterisations. Before presenting this perspective, it is appropriate to explain the meaning of some terms to be used in this discussion. The word "system" is not used in the traditional geological sense, but in the more universal sense to denote a body of interacting and interdependent parts. The disposal medium is viewed as a part of the system to be employed, not to be treated in isolation from the geological system of which it is only a part. An additional term, characterisation, is used in the recognition that we cannot expect to define all the parts of a system as complex as the geological system within which disposal of waste is to be carried out. The overall objective must be to gain a knowledge of those processes pertinent to containment within the system which is sufficient to rationalise the potential for waste/system interaction. AN HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE A new class of industrial development has appeared within the last 30 to 40 years. This class of engineered structures can be identified on the basis of the consequences of operational failure. For these structures, such failure is apparently of potentially far greater severity, in terms of public health, than is the case for other industrial development. In recognition of this fact, a far greater level of effort and care in siting, design, and construction is warranted. Examples of this class of structures are nuclear power plants and such chemical facilities as LNG plants. Commonly, the design lives of such facilities are approximately 40 years. Regulation of such development has been established at a national level. The relevant national and other regulatory bodies have sought a much more stringent degree of performance assessment than previously known. Because of the potential impact which such a facility can have in terms of escape of hazardous material in the event of operational failure, a knowledge of the natural environment of the facility is required. The process of safety assessment is thus dependent upon a wide range of scientific disciplines, not simply upon that which governs the industrial process of concern, such as chemical or nuclear engineering. Yet it would be unreasonable to assume that man has an equivalent level of understanding of each technical discipline of relevance. To assume that the levels of knowledge of nuclear physics and of geologic processes were similarly advanced at the onset of nuclear power development, for example, would be absurd.
- Geology > Geological Subdiscipline (1.00)
- Geology > Structural Geology > Tectonics > Plate Tectonics (0.47)
- Water & Waste Management > Solid Waste Management (1.00)
- Energy > Power Industry > Utilities > Nuclear (1.00)
- Energy > Oil & Gas (1.00)
- North America > United States > West Virginia > Appalachian Basin (0.99)
- North America > United States > Pennsylvania > Appalachian Basin (0.99)
- North America > United States > Ohio > Appalachian Basin (0.99)
- (2 more...)
The PDF file of this paper is in Russian. In the face of reserves depletion the alternative solution aimed to maintain oil production level is unconventional reservoirs development. Due to increasing percentage of wells targeted to unconventional reserves and on some oil fields to oil rims presented by low permeability (less than 0.0005 mkm2) and low net-to-gross ratio (less than 30%), the investigation of available and development of new approaches to analysis of the geological features of the heterogeneous reservoirs (particularly estimation of the reservoir's connectivity and effective permeability) and approaches to simulation (matching and forecast) of production profiles for complex geology is required. Adoption of advanced technologies in oil industry as to well stimulation techniques (hydraulic fracturing and horizontal wells drilling with multi-stage hydraulic fracturing) and mathematical modelling of the field development requires application of the knowledges about geological heterogeneity of the reservoir considered as the uncertainty. Most commonly, geological uncertainty is one of the most important factors influencing the field development design. Hydrocarbon reserves, amount and rate of change of oil/gas/water production determine basic types of geological uncertainty: static and dynamic respectively. The article presents the results of numerical calculations performed on the base of synthetic stochastic 3D geological and simulation models. The method used for geological models creation, based on variation of geological parameters (net-to-gross ratio, vertical and horizontal variogram ranges) is described. Impact of the parameters changes on the results of statistical estimation of the static constituent of geological uncertainty (value of the parameters characterizing geological uncertainty such as reservoir compartmentalization, thickness, length, and portion of connected volumes) and dynamic constituent of geological uncertainty (oil recovery factor) are analyzed. Influence of the geological parameters on geological heterogeneity and influence of geological heterogeneity on forecasted oil recovery factor are revealed. Thus, based on the abovementioned analysis the approach for multivariate optimization of the field development of tight oil reservoirs with low connectivity is provided.
- Asia > Russia > Ural Federal District > Khanty-Mansi Autonomous Okrug > West Siberian Basin > Central Basin > Priobskoye (Northern Part) Field (0.99)
- Africa > Middle East > Algeria > Ouargla Province > Hassi Messaoud > Oued Mya Basin > Hassi Messaoud Field (0.99)
- Africa > Middle East > Algeria > Ouargla Province > Hassi Messaoud > Berkine Basin (Trias/Ghadames Basin) > Hassi Messaoud Field (0.99)
ABSTRACT: A review of Geological Engineering education in Canada was conducted to assess the effectiveness of current undergraduate university curricula. The courses taught by each of the five universities currently offering Geological Engineering in the English language were assessed for content. In addition, the responses to surveys distributed by email across the country were compiled and assessed. The following conclusions can be drawn from this work:Geological Engineering enrolments are low, must increase to meet expected future demand and can be bolstered in a number of ways. There are three main pillars of Geological Engineering education related to Earth materials: Soil, Water and Rock. Only 25% or less or each university's curriculum is focussed on the three pillars, with strongly differing proportions of each subject depending upon the university's research strengths. Courses in the three pillar areas or in Engineering Geology were judged by survey respondents to be the most useful courses by far, and are the subject of the top five job categories. INTRODUCTION Geological Engineering education in Canada is at a cross-roads at the start of the new millennium. This is primarily due to limited student enrolments and the financial pressures placed on universities and secondary school education. In Canada, three Geological Engineering programs have closed in recent years, leaving only eight, while two others have recently successfully defended themselves against threatened loss of engineering accreditation. Even though Canadian Universities deliver programs that provide an excellent foundation in Geological Engineering and have students graduating with excellent job opportunities, enrolment levels in most Geological Engineering programs continue to be far below those in other engineering disciplines. There is concern that increased demand for Geological Engineers will not be balanced by sufficient numbers of graduates from engineering geology programs.
- Education > Educational Setting > Higher Education (1.00)
- Education > Curriculum > Subject-Specific Education (1.00)
- Education > Educational Setting > K-12 Education > Secondary School (0.89)
SYNOPSIS: The visualization of geological structures (rock contacts, fractured zones, faults, dykes, etc.) is essential for the analysis of rock masses before and during the excavation of large underground caverns. A relatively light methodology was developed for model construction using only a database and AutoCAD® or 3ds Max®. This simplicity allows having step by step models, from investigation to construction phase. The benefits, presented through case studies, are obvious for geological interpretations but above all for rock mechanics and civil engineering, due to the simplicity of visualization. 1 PRESENT STATE OF 3D GEOLOGICAL MODELLING Except on large and long-term projects for which the investment is possible, medium- or smallsize projects generally do not invest on 3D geological modelling (3D being taken here in the sense of visualization or representation of geological features). Too often, geological input data stay, in the best cases, at a 2D level and in the great majority in paper reports At present, geological software programmes can be categorized into four types: - oil & gas software programmes, covering a wide range of activities, from geophysical survey to wireline logging; they are often restricted to oil & gas industry since rather expensive. They are more adapted to sedimentary rocks with sub-horizontal structural features than to hard rock environments with sub-vertical features (joints, dykes, etc.), - mining software programmes, nowadays extremely powerful and covering much more than the geological aspects; the market of mining software is mature and software programmes have been developed for precise goals; however, these big software programmes are difficult to handle, need a dedicated training and finally cannot be used by anyone. They are now easily run on standard PCs, - tool-box programmes, generally composed of several (even many) independent modules, sold separately; these software programmes are relatively easy to use and thus represent good tools for field and/or desktop geologists; 2D is common but 3D is less achievable; they can be run on PCs and even laptops, - imagery software programmes, used for earth sciences and medical sciences; they represent the uppermost visualization systems in 3D but need quite big computers and powerful graphic cards. 2 CONSTRAINTS IN 3D MODELLING OF GEOLOGICAL STRUCTURE Very often and especially during investigation and design phases, the use of a geological software programme remains too often a constraint instead of being a help for a project team. Reasons are multiple, and among others one can itemize the following ones: - using the software programme is uneasy (if not difficult) - software programmes are good to model geology but less efficient to represent complex underground works, requiring frequent import from and export to AutoCAD® - too often, models can only be read using the modelling software itself which requires all users to be connected or to have a licence of the software on their computer - 3D models are not accurate in term of image quality and rendering - the cost of geological software programmes (licence or lease) can be prohibitive for small projects.
- Geology > Geological Subdiscipline > Geomechanics (0.35)
- Geology > Rock Type > Metamorphic Rock (0.34)
- Geology > Rock Type > Igneous Rock (0.34)
- Geology > Geological Subdiscipline > Environmental Geology > Hydrogeology (0.31)
- Geophysics > Borehole Geophysics (0.54)
- Geophysics > Seismic Surveying (0.48)
Retrospective Analysis of Geological Exploration 2010 - 2020
Mostovoy, Pavel (LLC Gazpromneft-GEO) | Safarov, Ildar (LLC Gazpromneft-GEO) | Tumanov, Evgeniy (LLC Gazpromneft-GEO) | Zaytseva, Maria (LLC Gazpromneft-GEO) | Aksenov, Maksim (LLC Gazpromneft-GEO) | Vorobyev, Vladimir (LLC Gazpromneft Science & Technology Centre)
Abstract Oil and gas companies’ future production profile is shaped by their exploration strategy and resource base development. Gazprom Neft's production profile will include 40% of current exploration projects by 2030. Geological exploration, on the other hand, is a high-risk business because it involves a lot of uncertainty due to the geological complexity of the targets being explored, as well as a lot of risky capital. Taking these factors into account, the Company will need to expand its exploration function as well as its approaches to managing exploration projects in order to meet its lofty aims. To determine the key areas of growth and a strategy for the exploration function development in the coming years, it was decided to first analyze the geological exploration activity in the Company in 2010 – 2020 period. The knowledge of achievements, success stories, and development areas is the fulcrum for future victories. Therefore, retrospective analysis is an important tool for the development of any system of activity - individual, organization, or state.
- North America > United States (0.28)
- Europe (0.28)
- Research Report > New Finding (0.74)
- Research Report > Experimental Study (0.65)
- Data Science & Engineering Analytics > Information Management and Systems (1.00)
- Production and Well Operations (0.90)
- Management > Strategic Planning and Management > Exploration and appraisal strategies (0.67)
- Reservoir Description and Dynamics > Reservoir Characterization > Seismic processing and interpretation (0.46)