See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/282074029

Active seismic methods in geothermal exploration – A review

Conference Paper · October 2015

CITATIONS READS

0 829

7 authors, including:

Stewart Greenhalgh Fabienne Reiser

ETH Zurich ETH Zurich
327 PUBLICATIONS   3,075 CITATIONS    19 PUBLICATIONS   58 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

J.-F. Girard
University of Strasbourg
77 PUBLICATIONS   645 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

The Galperin Source View project

cavity detection with Rayleigh Waves View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Cedric Schmelzbach on 05 March 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Active seismic methods in geothermal exploration – A review
1 1 1 2,3
Cédric Schmelzbach , Stewart Greenhalgh , Fabienne Reiser , Jean-François Girard , François
2 2 2
Bretaudeau , Laure Capar , Adnand Bitri
1 2 3
Institute of Geophysics, ETH Zurich, Switzerland; BRGM, Orléans, France; Institut de Physique du Globe de
Strasbourg, France

Introduction

The high temperatures needed for economical geothermal electricity production are generally found at
depths of at least a few kilometres in the Earth’s crust. Suitable subsurface imaging tools are required to
identify and characterise geothermal reservoirs in detail at these depths. Seismic-reflection imaging has a
greater depth penetration with reasonable resolution compared to other geophysical methods used to
investigate geothermal reservoirs (e.g., gravity, magnetic, electrical-resistivity and electromagnetic surveys).
Although it is used extensively in hydrocarbon exploration, seismic-reflection imaging has been only rarely
used in geothermal exploration to date. Seismic surveying provides a powerful and essential pre-requisite to
assess the feasibility of geothermal projects and to reduce the risk associated with an expensive drilling
programme. Targets in geothermal exploration are permeable zones of sufficiently high temperature and
fluid movement; such zones are mostly controlled by faults and fractures. Hence, the focus in seismic
geothermal exploration is mapping deep sedimentary and basement structures such as faults and fracture
zones. Various sophisticated seismic imaging techniques have been developed for the oil and gas industry,
not only for exploration but also monitoring of reservoirs during production. It needs to be investigated how
these techniques can be adapted and applied to geothermal sites to improve the planning and development
of geothermal reservoirs. Here, we (1) summarize the challenges and current status of geothermal seismic
exploration, (2) discuss how geothermal seismic exploration can benefit from experience with seismic
methods in hydrocarbon and metaliferrous ore exploration, and (3) review advanced seismic processing
techniques that could potentially be of value for the seismic imaging of geothermal reservoirs.

Challenges and status of geothermal seismic exploration

Most reservoirs in enhanced geothermal systems (EGS) will be located in hardrock basement rather than in
the sedimentary section. Because the impedance contrasts and reflection coefficients between most
crystalline rocks are smaller than those of sedimentary rocks, the signal-to-noise ratio (S/N) will be low,
making it more difficult to image structures (e.g, fracture zones, fluids) in the basement. Moreover, the target
reflectors are likely to be rough and of limited spatial extent, further reducing signal amplitudes and
exacerbating their detection. A further problem is that long offsets are needed to get reliable velocity
information and to image basement. Recently, Hlousek et al. (2015) reported on the 3D imaging of fault
zones in the western Erzgebirge (Germany) using advanced imaging techniques; Abul Kahir et al. (2015)
proposed a seismic work flow for EGS to characterize fracture zones within deep hot granites in the Cooper
Basin (Australia).

Hydrothermal systems are naturally occurring, they are limited in geographic location and it is a key
challenge to find them. Seismic exploration can be used to image the lateral extent of an aquifer and to
characterize the associated fault and fracture systems. As an example, Lüschen et al. (2014) analysed a 3D
seismic data set from Unteraching (Munich, Germany) to study the Malm sequence that is the target
formation for a hydrothermal reservoir. Seismic attributes were used to distinguish different facies and
azimuth-dependent reflectivity provided indications on preferred fracture orientations.

Lessons to be learned from hydrocarbon and hardrock seismic exploration

Geothermal exploration is an emerging technology and extracting energy from deep sedimentary basins
(and/or the underlying basement) has become a desirable option. Oil companies have explored in great
detail many sedimentary basins throughout the world, hence, a lot can be learned from the oil and gas

Mid-Term-Conference, Pisa 12-13/10/2015  

industry in terms of advanced exploration techniques. For example, fracture zone imaging and
characterization is of equal importance to hydrocarbon exploration as it is to geothermal exploration. Several
studies have been published on fracture mapping using, for example, amplitude-versus-offset (AVO)
variations. The development of 3D seismic technology allowing the accurate positing of reflectors in three
dimensions had a major impact on hydrocarbon exploration. Furthermore, 3D seismic data cubes provide the
possibility of extensive attribute analyses, which is widely used for fracture characterization. The repeated
acquisition of 3D seismic data (4D or time-lapse seismic monitoring) enables the mapping of changes in
reservoir properties such as saturation, temperature and pressure, provided that the changes in these
properties lead to detectable changes in seismic signals at the surface and the repeatability of the surveys is
high.

EGS systems have their maximum potential in crystalline rock. So far, extensive seismic-exploration studies
over hardrock environments are mainly related to mineral exploration, finding suitable underground
repositories for radioactive waste, and assorted geological studies, especially crustal investigations. There
are several challenges one needs to face in hardrock seismic exploration: reflection amplitudes are generally
weak and the resultant low S/N makes it challenging to image features within the basement; reflectors are
often small, steeply dipping and laterally discontinuous due to more complex morphology, lithology and
deformation; the high velocities in crystalline basement result in a loss of resolution due to the relatively
longer wavelengths; anisotropy can be introduced through fractures and layering leading to complex wave
propagation. Deep crustal studies helped to develop the requisite acquisition and processing techniques for
crystalline environments. These large-scale images can also provide valuable information when looking for
potential geothermal sites.

Advanced seismic processing techniques

Over the last few decades, numerous advanced seismic processing techniques have been developed by the
oil and gas industry. It needs to be established through detailed testing which of these techniques can be
best adapted and applied to geothermal seismic exploration.

Seismic attributes are quantities that can be derived from seismic data in order to extract structural and
lithological information of the subsurface. Azimuth and dip attributes, coherency, curvature and spectral
decomposition have been used to characterize fracture zones in detail. These as well as other attributes
could be further tested to evaluate the potential for fracture mapping in crystalline basement. Applications of
attribute analysis in geothermal exploration to enhance the visibility of fracture zones have been reported by,
for example, Lüschen et al. (2014) and Abul Khair et al. (2015).

Multicomponent seismic data offer many advantages compared to standard vertical component seismic data
in that additional and useful information can be extracted such as polarization properties. Polarization
information can be used to determine the direction of different arriving wave types as well as to provide the
possibility for application of polarization filters and wavefield separation techniques. For example, by
implementing polarization information in migration algorithms, different P- and S-wave images can be
obtained. Since P- and S-wavefields sample the subsurface in different ways, complementary information
can be extracted. S-wave imaging has the advantage of being less affected by absorption in gas bearing
fracture zones, enables studying anisotropy by shear wave splitting, provides more detailed lithological
characterization, and improves fluid discrimination and reservoir monitoring. Characterizing fractures
(orientation, density) as well as understanding the stress state of the subsurface is of great importance in
geothermal exploration. Studying S-wave splitting on, for example, vertical seismic profiling (VSP) data,
could therefore provide critical information on fracture orientation and intensity in the subsurface.

The seismic responses of the typically small and steeply dipping targets of importance in geothermal
exploration (e.g., fracture planes, shear zones, fluid pathways, faults) in the hardrock basement are more
characteristically diffractions (diffuse wavefield) rather than specular reflections. The detection and
processing of such small diffraction signatures places severe demands on seismic data acquisition and

Mid-Term-Conference, Pisa 12-13/10/2015  

 requires specialized processing tools. Yet, diffraction imaging potentially provides high-resolution (sub-
wavelength) information and makes it possible to detect small-scale discontinuities.

Full Waveform Inversion (FWI) is an imaging method that aims to exploit simultaneously the whole seismic
data along each trace to reconstruct high-resolution quantitative images of the characteristic parameters
(seismic velocities, density, attenuation) of large areas of the subsurface. Since the whole seismograms are
used for FWI, the most complete representation of the subsurface is expected. Thus, FWI is expected to be
able to provide quantitative images with the resolution of migration and diffraction imaging (half of the
shortest wavelength expected for favourable illumination). To date, FWI has not been used for geothermal
exploration. As the exploration depth and surface illumination configurations are similar to oil and gas
exploration, application of FWI to geothermal targets can benefit from all the developments made for oil
prospecting, but will still be subject to the same difficulties and limitations (cost of forward modelling;
construction of an accurate initial model for velocity, density and attenuation; data pre-processing when the
modelling relies on strong assumptions such as acoustic propagation only).

Conclusions and outlook

Most EGS reservoirs will be located in hardrock (basement) rather than the sedimentary section. Because
the impedance contrasts and reflection coefficients between most crystalline rocks are smaller than those of
sedimentary rocks, the S/N will be low, making it more difficult to image structures (e.g, fracture zones,
fluids) in the basement. Moreover, the target reflectors are likely to be rough and of limited spatial extent,
further reducing signal amplitudes and exacerbating their detection and delineation. Consequently, particular
care must be taken in survey planning, acquisition and processing to maximize the signal-to-noise ratio.

The structures of importance in geothermal exploration are expected to be complex in shape and steeply
dipping, which means that the reflections will tend to arrive at the surface in unexpected locations. Therefore
it will be necessary to model surveys beforehand in future seismic experiments to determine optimum
locations for sources and receivers and to aid with the interpretation of the data. The targets (e.g. fracture
zones) are small and will more likely appear as diffractions rather than as reflections on seismic profiles.

Most existing reflection seismic data over potential geothermal fields data were acquired for hydrocarbon
exploration purposes, where the survey layout was designed to image the sedimentary column. The
recording apertures (maximum source-receiver distances) are mostly inadequate for imaging steep dips
within the basement. Very few successful geothermal-specific seismic reflection surveys have been carried
out in the past. Future surveys will require every degree of sophistication that can be brought to bear. The
vast experience of oilfield seismic imaging has much to offer in illuminating the route towards a solution but
the geothermal problem is unique. The major technical modifications need to be in the use of 3D arrays and
multicomponent sensors, coupled with sophisticated processing, including attribute analysis, polarization
filtering/migration and the separation of diffracted and specular reflected wavefields. Full waveform inversion
and S-wave splitting investigations can be profitably carried out provided that the data are of sufficient
quality. There are grounds for optimism that the geothermal reservoir-imaging problem can be meaningfully
tackled.

References

Abul Khair, H., Cooke, D., and Hand, M. (2015), Seismic mapping and geomechanical analyses of faults within deep hot
granites, a workflow for enhanced geothermal system projects. Geothermics, 53, 46-56.

Hlousek, F., Hellwig, O., and Buske, S. (2015), Three-dimensional focused seismic imaging for geothermal exploration in
crystalline rock near Schneeberg, Germany. Geophysical Prospecting, 63, 999-1014.

Lüschen, E., Wolfgramm, M., Fritzer, T., Dussel, M., Thomas, R., and Schulz, R. (2014), 3D seismic survey explores
geothermal targets for reservoir characterization at Unterhaching, Munich, Germany. Geothermics, 50, 167-179.

Mid-Term-Conference, Pisa 12-13/10/2015  

View publication stats