[First Hit]

Datapages, Inc.Print this page

Click to view article as PDF file.   

 

GCSeismic Attributes of Gas Hydrate Previous HitSystemsNext Hit*

By

Diana Sava and Bob Hardage1

 
Search and Discovery Article #40255 (2007)
Posted August 31, 2007
 
*Adapted from the Geophysical Corner column, prepared by the authors, in AAPG Explorer, August, 2007, and entitled “Diving Into Gas Hydrate Previous HitSystemsNext Hit.” Editor of Geophysical Corner is Bob A. Hardage. Managing Editor of AAPG Explorer is Vern Stefanic; Larry Nation is Communications Director.
 
1Bureau of Economic Geology, The University of Texas at Austin ([email protected])

 

 

General Statement 

The need to understand deepwater gas hydrate Previous HitsystemsNext Hit is increasing, as several quarters of the geosciences world want answers about: 

1)  The use of hydrate as an energy resource.

2)  The role of hydrate in seafloor stability.

3)  Hydrate linkage to shallow-water flow.

4)  The nature of hydrate system architecture.

 

Gas hydrate (Figure 1) is a solid material in which water molecules link together to form a cage, or clathrate, which encloses a single gas molecule. Several of these clathrates then link together to form a basic “unit volume” of crystalline hydrate. Depending on the type of gas molecules that are trapped in these cages, the number of clathrates that are linked to form these unit volumes may be 8 (Structure I), 24 (Structure II) or 6 (Structure H).  

Because this ice-like material affects VP and VS seismic propagation velocities in deepwater sediment, it appears that accurate measurements of VP and VS made across deepwater, near-seafloor strata may allow hydrate concentrations within these strata to be estimated. However, a major problem that confronts geophysicists who attempt to use seismic attributes to infer hydrate concentration in deepwater Previous HitsystemsNext Hit is that no one knows with confidence how these small unit-building blocks of hydrate are distributed within their host sediment.
 

uGeneral Statement

uFigure Captions

uMorphologies

uConcentration problems

uCore analyses

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

uGeneral Statement

uFigure Captions

uMorphologies

uConcentration problems

uCore analyses

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

uGeneral Statement

uFigure Captions

uMorphologies

uConcentration problems

uCore analyses

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

uGeneral Statement

uFigure Captions

uMorphologies

uConcentration problems

uCore analyses

Figure Captions

Figure 1. Core recovered from the Johnson Sealink cruise in the Gulf of Mexico in July, 2001. Photo courtesy Ian McDonald, Texas A&M.

Figure 2. Four possible models of gas hydrate Previous HitsystemsNext Hit: (A) load-bearing hydrate; (B) Previous HitporeNext Hit-filling hydrate; (C) thin layers of pure hydrate intercalated with layers of hydrate-free sediment; (D) thin layers of load-bearing hydrate intercalated with thin layers of hydrate-free sediment. Hydrate is represented in blue, with sediment in black.

Figure 3. P-wave velocity VP shown as a function of the volumetric fraction of hydrate (Cgh) in deepwater sediment for each of the four hydrate-sediment models illustrated in Figure 2. Layer Models C and D allow both a slow mode (dashed curve) and a fast mode (solid curve) to propagate. Sediment porosity is assumed to be 0.37, and the effective pressure is set at 0.01MPa.

Figure 4. S-wave velocity VS shown as a function of the volumetric fraction of hydrate (Cgh) in deepwater sediment for each of the four hydrate-sediment models illustrated in Figure 2. Layer Models C and D allow both a slow mode (dashed curve) and a fast mode (solid curve) to propagate. Sediment porosity is defined to be 0.37, and effective pressure is assumed to be 0.01 MPa.

 

Four Hydrate-Sediment Morphologies 

Four possible hydrate-sediment morphologies are illustrated in Figure 2:

1)  Model A assumes that the unit volumes of linked clathrates make physical contact with the sediment grains, become a part of the matrix, and bear part of the sediment load.

2)  Model B assumes that the unit hydrate volumes float freely in the Previous HitporeNext Hit spaces and do not bear any sediment load.

3)  In Model C, many unit volumes link together to form thin layers of pure hydrate, and the hydrate system is a series of these pure-hydrate layers alternating with layers of hydrate-free sediment.

4)  Model D is similar to “C,” except the layers of pure hydrate are replaced with layers of uniformly dispersed, load-bearing hydrate, the concept described by “A.”

 

In some areas, hydrate no doubt exists in vertical fractures and dikes, but for brevity, vertically oriented hydrate distributions are not included in this suite of models.

 

Problems in Determining Concentration 

The dilemma confronting hydrate investigators is that for any given hydrate concentration, seismic propagation velocity changes significantly for each of these possible hydrate distributions (Model A, B, C, and D). For example, P-wave velocity VP for each of these four hydrate models is illustrated in Figure 3 as a function of hydrate concentration, and S-wave velocity VS behavior is shown in Figure 4. 

For a fixed concentration of hydrate (say a volumetric fraction of 30 percent), VP can range from 3300 m/s (Model D, fast mode) to 2000 m/s (Model C, slow mode), and VS can vary from 1600 m/s (Model D, fast mode) to 200 m/s (Model B). As a result, seismic-based and well log-measured values of VP and VS cannot be used to predict deepwater hydrate concentration unless you know how the hydrate is distributed inside its host sediment.

 

Laboratory Analyses of Cores 

This lack of understanding about hydrate-sediment morphologies in deepwater strata exists because there is such a paucity of laboratory analyses of cores that traverse deepwater hydrate Previous HitsystemsNext Hit. For seismic and well log analyses of deepwater hydrates to accelerate at a faster pace, deepwater cores:

 

1)  Must be obtained.

2)  Must be maintained in their in situ temperature and pressure environment.

3)  Must be subjected to laboratory studies while maintaining these in situ conditions.

 

These laboratory tests must be designed so that the spatial distribution of hydrate throughout each test sample is accurately defined for specific hydrate Previous HitsystemsTop. Only then can researchers decide whether Model A, B, C, and/or D, or some other hydrate morphology model, describes the rock physics concepts that have to be used to relate VP, VS and other seismic attributes to hydrate concentration in each type of hydrate environment that needs to be evaluated in deepwater basins.

 

Return to top.