IPA07-G-064

PROCEEDINGS, INDONESIAN PETROLEUM ASSOCIATION Thirty-First Annual Convention and Exhibition, May 2007 DETERMINING THE COAL BED METHANE DISTRIBUTION BASED ON AMPLITUDE VARIATION WITH OFFSET (AVO) ANALYSIS AND SEISMIC INVERSION: CASE STUDY OF SUMATRA BASIN
Padmadi Heru Wibawa* Abd. Haris** Suprajitno M.***

ABSTRACT Amplitude variation with offset (AVO) analysis certainly proved to be useful tool, not only for hydrocarbon reservoirs detection, but also for basic reservoir characterization and, more recently, for reservoir monitoring. In this study, we applied the AVO analysis to detect the existence and distribution of the methane gas embedded in the coal, which commonly called Coal Bed Methane (CBM). In AVO, the reflection coefficients at the target horizon (such as the top or the bottom of a hydrocarbon reservoir) are the fundamental quantities to be analyzed as function of offset. Therefore in order to characterize the complete reservoir including the body of the layer, we combined the AVO technique with the Elastic Impedance (EI) inversion. The EI inversion is dedicated to provide the elastic parameter such as Poissons ratio, (), Lambda-rho () and Mu-rho (), which is believed to be able to enhance the level of thrust in interpretation. The results show that AVO analysis can be used to provide the early indication of CBM existence, which is indicated by the AVO anomalous (i.e. increasing amplitude with increasing offset) at the top of CBM. This indication has a good match with the inversion result, which is illustrated by the pattern of CBM distribution and cross plot of of vs , vs , and vs . Key words: AVO Analysis, EI inversion, CBM INTRODUCTION Coal bed methane (CBM) is one of the alternative energy sources, which is simply methane found in
* ** *** Directorate General of Oil and Gas University of Indonesia PPPTMGB LEMIGAS

coal seams. It is produced by non-traditional means and generated either from a biological process as a result of microbial action or from a thermal process as a result of increasing heat with depth of the coal. Often a coal seam is saturated with water, with methane is held in the coal by water pressure. Therefore, the existence of CBM is geologically found in the coal mining area. Currently, natural gas from coal beds play important role in contributing the total natural gas production, particularly in developed country. Some major oil and gas companies have now paid extensive attention to CBM reservoirs as relatively new production opportunities. The rapid spatial heterogeneity of coal physical properties, methane saturation levels, and coal fracture systems and flow paths makes these targets a challenging prospect for reservoir characterization and estimation of spatial distribution of CBM from seismic data. In this study, we present the Elastic Impedance (EI) inversion of the recorded seismic amplitude variation with offset (AVO) data to appraise the influence of several data-related factor that control the vertical resolution and accuracy of the estimated spatial distribution of CBM, which is represented with the elastic parameter such as Poissons ratio, (), Lambda-rho () and Mu-rho (). The presence of CBM, which contain the different composition and its existence in the pore volume compared to a gas-sand reservoir, become an interesting investigation for AVO behavior. The existence of CBM is absorbed in micropore volume while the conventional gas-sand is floated in the pore volume. Figure 1 represents the composition of CBM in the coal seam. The different situation between CBM and conventional gas-sand reservoir may or not result in amplitude variation versus offset. Detailed analysis on AVO behavior of CBM

is presented by using AVO Intercept (I), Gradient (G) and its product (I*G). This AVO attributes provide the characteristic of CBM interface. Additionally, the properties of CBM body are obtained from the EI inversion result. This study is based on the use of cross-well seismic data of Rambutan Field in the South Sumatra Basin. This field is acknowledged as the first rank of coal potential. We estimate that the spatial distribution of the velocity change approximates 5 to 10 % above the coal as well as inside the coal layer. This difference can be attributed primarily to change in pore-fluids saturation on occasioned by the dewatering process. AVO-EI INVERSION Joint AVO and EI inversion is becoming useful tool in order to have the comprehensive physical properties either the interface or the body of layer. In addition, both are important in mapping the distribution of CBM. There are many AVO applications in the oil/gas industry for direct hydrocarbon detection since the mid 1980s. By using prestack P-wave reflection data from a multichannel layout, AVO analysis can be used to predict reservoir properties and fluid content and, in some cases, to determine the spatial location of gas/water and gas/oil contacts. Ostranders (1984) pioneering work established AVOs theoretical basis for detecting low-impedance gas sands. Shueys (1985) linear simplification of Zoeppritz equations is represented as follows the

study, the only published example is Ramos and Davis (1997). These limitations of published paper have been the dramatic differences in geologic and geophysical characteristics of conventional gassands reservoirs versus CBM reservoirs. In the view of theoretical aspect, there are similarities in implementing the AVO analysis for gas sands reservoirs and for CBM reservoirs, i.e., the significant Poissons ratio contrasts at reflection interfaces that result in an AVO gradient anomaly. Ostrander (1984) and Shuey (1985) showed that Poissons ratio contrast at shale/sandstone interface is the factor controlling AVO behavior of gas-sands. A significant Poissons ratio contrast, either positive or negative, results in significant AVO gradient anomaly. This is still true for the reflection interfaces of a coal seam. However, the reason for the existence of the Poissons ratio contrasts at the interfaces of a coal seam is quite different than at shale/gas-sands interfaces. A Poissons ratio contrast at a shale/gas-sands interface is caused or increased by gas saturation. Laboratory analyses of cores show that P-wave velocities in sandstone decrease significantly while S-wave velocities increase by a small percent when water in pores is replaced by gas (Ostrander, 1984). In reality, the sharp decrease in P-wave velocity occurs as gas saturation increases from 0% to 10%. The influence of CBM itself on Poissons ratio of the coal seam is negligible, except for rare cases. CBM exists in coal seams in two ways: in the adsorbed state and in the free gas state. More than 90% of CBM in coal is adsorbed onto the internal structure of the coal in a condensed, near liquidlike state (Yee et al., 1993; Zhou and Lin, 1999). The weak attractive forces (Van der Waals forces) existing between pairs of molecules or atoms, as well as the pressure produced by the overlying water column, hold the adsorbed CBM to the coal (Steidl, 1996). Specific joint impedance inversion, whereby both P and S reflectivity, are inverted by layer. The technique provides improved noise immunity, computational efficiency and provides the opportunity to provide both velocity and lithology constraint. In the EI inversion, we refer to the inversion procedure as one-dimension (1D) to emphasize the fact that each CMP gather is assumed to be result of plane-wave reflection from a stack of homogeneous and isotropic horizontal layer. The inversion algorithm assumes that a) the input CMP gather is properly migrated and corrected for NMO

R( ) = Rp + (Rp 2Rs )sin 2 ( )

(1) The equation (1) allowed finishing AVO processing of large data sets quickly, and brought in groups of AVO attributes. Rutherford and Williams (1989) classification of AVO anomalies relates various AVO phenomena to their geologic and geophysical origins, establishing a consistent, theoretical, AVOanomaly interpretation system. Many researchers work (e.g., Smith and Gidlow (1987), Swan (1993), Castagna and Smith (1994), and Chen (1995)) have groups of direct hydrocarbon indicators to help the exploration in drilling targets. The discussion on the implementation of AVO analysis to CBM exploration is still limited to few authors. A few researchers are engaged in this

effects, b) the input prestack seismic amplitudes are devoid of multiple reflection effects, c) the frequency spectrum of the input wavelet is constant with time over any particular analysis window. In this case EI inversion is used to extract elastic data in a variety of forms. One common objective is the extraction of impedance contrasts. These are given as IP/IP = / + / and IS/IS = / + / (2) Where IP and IS are P-wave and S-wave impedances, and are P-wave and S-wave velocities, and is the density. Contrasts of the form A/A are defined as the difference in A across the interface, divided by its average across the interface. Fatti et al. (1994) demonstrated that one could reasonably extract IP and IS contrasts and discard information. Goodway et al. showed that IP and IS could be profitably converted to the Lam parameters, and . These references highlight some of the current interest in impedances. The AVO analysis and EI inversion are carried out on seismic line after careful reprocessing of the line with pre-stack migration, which is intersecting logged borehole. Detailed work flow for this study is shown in Figure 2 (upper to lower, respectively). The study is performed in two separate works. The first, we perform AVO analysis to produce the sensitive AVO attribute, i.e. Intercept and Gradient. We then continue by performing the EI inversion to produce the cross-section of and . RESULTS AND DISCUSSION We first analyze the well log data set to identify the coal seam. The log shows that six coal seams can be identified in thickness variation as shown in Figure 3. The coal seam is marked by the sign of A1 up to A6. This figure is also showing the seismic well correlation, which represents the good match up to 75%. For detailed investigation, we consider the last three upper part of the coal seam (A1 to A3), which is marked by zone of interest. The zone of interest is represented in Figure 4 with CDP range from 4650 4900 and time range from 560 705 ms. The section shows strong reflection in top and the bottom of coal seam, it can be seen along the line. This characteristic is typical of the direct hydrocarbon indicator.

The processing of AVO data used P-wave data. Preliminary processing included refraction statics, amplitude-preserving processing, deconvolution, noise elimination, CMP sorting, velocity analysis, NMO correction, and residual statics. Heavy top muting was done to eliminate any possible critical reflections. Waldens (1991) robust linear regression was used to obtain intercept and gradient. Figure 5 shows the cross-section of AVO attributes i.e., the product of Intercept and Gradient for three coal seam (A1 A3). This section shows the top (blue) and the bottom (red) for each coal seam. The product of Intercept and Gradient can be further analyzed by looking at the angle gather and angle dependent reflectivity curve, which is displayed in Figure 6. The angle gather is taken from CDP 4758. The AVO curve shows that amplitude increase with increasing angle for top and the bottom of coal seam. This AVO anomaly is only shown by coal seam, which contains the gas or CBM case. Another example for coal seam with no gas content is shown in Figure 7. The angle gather is taken from CDP 4777. The AVO curve shows that amplitude decrease with increasing angle. In general, by considering the pattern of AVO attributes as shown in Figure 5, which is representing with the product of Intercept and Gradient, it can be said that the distribution of the CBM is not in massive formation but in patchy form. In addition, the pair of top and bottom of coal seam is also not complete. This indicated that the distribution of CBM could not be completely represented by the interface information. This means that AVO analysis for CBM reservoir is not completely working or it can be said that AVO for CBM reservoirs is not a direct method for detecting CBM. The techniques in petrology and geology can be employed to study factors, such as coal rank, type, quality, ash content, and moisture content. These techniques can determine also whether a coal seam is a potential target for CBM exploration. Then AVO for CBM reservoirs is employed to determine the positions of sweet spots within the coal seam, where the gas-in-place is relatively rich and where the cleat/fracture density is relatively higher. Looking at to the limitation of AVO analysis for CBM, it can be improved by applying inversion (i.e., EI inversion) that uses input of reflection amplitude of P-wave (Rp) and reflection amplitude of S-wave (Rs). The Rp and Rs parameters are extracted from AVO gradient analysis. The inversion process is applied to Rp and Rs in order to

derive the elastic parameters i.e., P impedance (Ip), S impedance (Is) and its derivative (, , and). EI inversion was conducted with angle stack of 20 degree. The inversion algorithm is an extension to non-zero offset of post stack constrained sparse spike inversion technique. Figure 8 shows the estimated P-impedance of three coal seams (A1 to A3), which depends solely on normal incidence reflectivity information. In general, it can be observed that the body of three coal seams has relatively low P-impedance. This relatively low impedance indicates the existence the gas in the coal seams (CBM). This means that P-impedance information can confirm the distribution of the CBM, which has been marked by AVO attributes showing the product of Intercept and Gradient on the top and bottom of coal seams (Figure 5). Well log data was selected for constrain the inversion model and for quality control. The estimated Pimpedance has good match with the well log and it is indicated by correlation coefficient of 80%. Applying the inversion process to the S-wave reflection (Rs) input result in the S-impedance. Figure 9 shows the estimated S-impedance, which is dependent on the far angle stack. It is expected that the existence of gas in the coal seams must be represented by the increasing S-impedance. The fact that this situation is shown mainly in the A1 layer. The high S-impedance is also shown in patchy form, which confirm to the AVO analysis results (Figure 5). The effort in making AVO robust for CBM reservoir, we derived the derivative parameters coming from P-impedance and S-impedance. These parameters are Poissons ratio, Lambda-Rho and Mu-Rho, which is able to predict the litology and fluid content as well. Mu-Rho gives information about the rock matrix, while Lambda-Rho is sensitive to fluid content. In addition, Poissons ratio is sensitive to gas saturation. Figure 10 shows the Poissons ratio section, which is derived from P and S-impedance. Refer to the theoretical background, it is expected that the existence of the gas in the coal seam must be indicated by low Poissons ratio. In general, it can be observed that all three coal seam show low Poissons ratio, particularly A1. In line to the Poissons ratio, the Lamda-Rho section, this is displayed in Figure 11. The same situation is shown by the Lambda-Rho, where all three coal seam show low value compared to the outside reservoir. Coal seam A1 show more clear distribution of

suspected CBM. The Mu-Rho section is represented by Figure 12. The Mu-Rho section shows relatively high value in some part, particularly in coal seam A1. For coal seam A2 and A3 is relatively constant only in few part has higher value. Integrated analysis based on the cross-plot among elastic parameters (i.e., Mu-Rho, Lambda-Rho and Poissons ratio) is becoming important to take look at the consistency of distribution of CBM. Figure 13 shows the cross-section, which is resulted from cross-plot of Mu-Rho vs Lambda-Rho (upper panel), Poissons ration vs Lambda Ratio (mid panel) and Poissons ratio vs Mu-Rho (lower panel). These three panels must be observed simultaneously to identify the distribution of CBM. In general, the CBM distribution is dominated in the coal seam A1 (upper part of the section). All three panel show the same pattern of CBM distribution, except small part, which is marked by red-ellipse.

CONCLUSSION We have applied AVO and EI inversion to seismic reflection data from the coal measures in Rambutan Field, South Sumatera Basin. The purpose was to map the distribution of CBM reservoir. A seismic line intersecting logged borehole was chosen so that an objective evaluation of the results could be made, and AVO analysis and EI inversion was carried out after careful reprocessing of the line with pre-stack migration. As coal-seams are thin beds in the seismic bandwidth, it was necessary to assume that elastic impedance values are important. Of the six coal-seams in the sequence, only three were chosen to become interest zone in anlysis. In addition, EI inversion was also carried out in the interest zone. It was found that integrated analysis based on the cross-plot of elastic parameter show consistence distribution of CBM. These results confirm the early indication of CBM predicted by the AVO attributes. We conclude that significant improvements of AVO analysis of CBM can be performed by doing the seismic inversion, particularly for elastic inversion.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT We are thankful to MEDCO for permiting the utilization of data and we are also grateful to Hampson Russel for software support in Reservoir Geophysics Laboratory, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Sains, University of Indonesia.

REFERENCES Castagna, J. P., and S. W. Smith, 1994, Comparison of AVO indicators: A modeling study: Geophysics, 59, 18491855. Chen, X-P., 1995, A method for determining, displaying and utilizing the relative changes of elastic moduli and that of density of geologic formations: Chinese Patent ZL-96-1-98446.5, American Patent 6 091 669 Fatti, J.L., Smith, G.C., Vail, P.J., Strauss, P.J., and Levitt, P.R., 1994. Detection of gas in sandstone reservoirs using AVO analysis: A 3-D seismic case history using the Geostack technique, Geophysics. 59, 1362-1376. Goodway, W., Chen, T., and Downton, J., 1997. Improved AVO fluid detection and lithology discrimination using Lame petrophysical parameters; "Lambda-Rho", "Mu- Rho", & "Lambda/Mu fluid stack", from P and S inversions: 1997 CSEG meeting abstracts, 148-151; CSEG Recorder, 22, 7, 3-5; 1997 SEG meeting abstracts, 183-186. Ostrander, W. J., 1984, Plane-wave reflection coefficients for gas sands at non-normal angles of incidence: Geophysics, 49, 16371648.

Ramos, A. C. B., and T. L. Davis, 1997, 3-D AVO analysis and modeling applied to fracture detection in coal-bed methane reservoirs: Geophysics, 62, 16831695. Shuey, R. T., 1985, A simplification of the Zoeppritz equations: Geophysics, 50, 609614. Smith, G. C., and P. M. Gidlow, 1987, Weighted stacking for rock property estimation and detection of gas: Geophysical Prospecting, 35, 9931014. Steidl, P. F., 1996, Coal as a Reservoir, in guide to coal-bed methane reservoir engineering, Gas Research Institute, Reference No. GRI-94/0397. Swan, H.W., 1993, Properties of direct AVO Hydrocarbon indicators, in J. P. Castagna and M. M. Backus, eds., Offset-dependent Reflectivity theory and practice of AVO analysis: SEG. Yee, D, J. P. Seidle, and W. B. Hanson, 1993, Gas Sorption on coal and measurement of gas content, in B. E. Law and D. D. Rice, eds, Hydrocarbons from coal, AAPG studies in Geology #38, The American Association of Petroleum Geologists. Zhou, S.-N., and B.-Q. Lin, 1999, The theory of gas flow and storage in coal Seams, China Coal Industry Publishing House.

Butt Cleat

Face Cleat

Matrix Blocks Containing Micropores

Figure 1 - Coal bed methane (CBM) is simply methane found in coal seams.

Figure 2 - Work flow for AVO and EI inversion.

Figure 3 - Seismic well correlation and thickness variation of coal seam.

Figure 4 - The zone of interest for detailed investigation of AVO analysis and EI Inversion.

Figure 5 - Section of Intercept and Gradient Product (red is top and blue is bottom of CBM).

Figure 6 - Angle dependent reflectivity of CDP 4758 (red is top and blue is bottom of CBM).

Figure 7 - Angle dependent reflectivity of CDP 4758 (red is top and blue is bottom of CBM).

Figure 8 - P impedance (Ip) inverted by Sparse Spike.

Figure 9 - S impedance (Is) inverted by Sparse Spike.

Figure 10 - Poissons Ratio section derived from P-impedance and S-impedance.

Figure 11 - Lambda Rho section derived from P-impedance and S-impedance.

Figure 12 - Mu Rho section derived from P-impedance and S-impedance.

Figure 13 - Cross section of the product of MRxLR (upper), PRxLR (mid) and PRxMR(lower).