Loading…
Using predictive uncertainty analysis to optimise tracer test design and data acquisition
•We investigate a field-scale injection trial of coal seam gas co-produced water.•We use numerical simulations to establish impact of injection.•We analyse the worth of field data to maximise reliability of impact assessment.•We use “data worth analysis” to optimise monitoring for the site.•We estab...
Saved in:
Published in: | Journal of hydrology (Amsterdam) 2014-07, Vol.515, p.191-204 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites Items that cite this one |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a461t-2489cdbd36c0b97f52f42586d06a28ebce0186e9dd97b791351dc13ad46516623 |
---|---|
cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a461t-2489cdbd36c0b97f52f42586d06a28ebce0186e9dd97b791351dc13ad46516623 |
container_end_page | 204 |
container_issue | |
container_start_page | 191 |
container_title | Journal of hydrology (Amsterdam) |
container_volume | 515 |
creator | Wallis, Ilka Moore, Catherine Post, Vincent Wolf, Leif Martens, Evelien Prommer, Henning |
description | •We investigate a field-scale injection trial of coal seam gas co-produced water.•We use numerical simulations to establish impact of injection.•We analyse the worth of field data to maximise reliability of impact assessment.•We use “data worth analysis” to optimise monitoring for the site.•We establish monitoring strategy which provides greatest return on investment.
Tracer injection tests are regularly-used tools to identify and characterise flow and transport mechanisms in aquifers. Examples of practical applications are manifold and include, among others, managed aquifer recharge schemes, aquifer thermal energy storage systems and, increasingly important, the disposal of produced water from oil and shale gas wells. The hydrogeological and geochemical data collected during the injection tests are often employed to assess the potential impacts of injection on receptors such as drinking water wells and regularly serve as a basis for the development of conceptual and numerical models that underpin the prediction of potential impacts.
As all field tracer injection tests impose substantial logistical and financial efforts, it is crucial to develop a solid a-priori understanding of the value of the various monitoring data to select monitoring strategies which provide the greatest return on investment.
In this study, we demonstrate the ability of linear predictive uncertainty analysis (i.e. “data worth analysis”) to quantify the usefulness of different tracer types (bromide, temperature, methane and chloride as examples) and head measurements in the context of a field-scale aquifer injection trial of coal seam gas (CSG) co-produced water. Data worth was evaluated in terms of tracer type, in terms of tracer test design (e.g., injection rate, duration of test and the applied measurement frequency) and monitoring disposition to increase the reliability of injection impact assessments. This was followed by an uncertainty targeted Pareto analysis, which allowed the interdependencies of cost and predictive reliability for alternative monitoring campaigns to be compared directly.
For the evaluated injection test, the data worth analysis assessed bromide as superior to head data and all other tracers during early sampling times. However, with time, chloride became a more suitable tracer to constrain simulations of physical transport processes, followed by methane. Temperature data was assessed as the least informative of the solute tracers. However, taking costs of da |
doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2014.04.061 |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1919959872</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0022169414003357</els_id><sourcerecordid>1642250151</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-a461t-2489cdbd36c0b97f52f42586d06a28ebce0186e9dd97b791351dc13ad46516623</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkU9rGzEQxUVJoY7bj1DQJZDLOhqt_p5CCUlbMOTSHHoSsqRNx2x2HUkO-NtXxqbXZhiYy2_mPeYR8hXYChiom-1q--cQ8zyuOAOxYq0VfCALMNp2XDN9QRaMcd6BsuITuSxly1r1vViQ308Fp2e6yyliqPiW6H4KKVePUz1QP_nxULDQOtN5V_EFS6I1-0bQmkqlMRV8nhoXafTVUx9e91iw4jx9Jh8HP5b05TyX5Onh_tfdj279-P3n3bd154WC2nFhbIib2KvANlYPkg-CS6MiU56btAmJgVHJxmj1RlvoJcQAvY9CSVCK90tyfbq7y_PrvplyzWVI4-inNO-LAwvWSmv0O1AlOJcMJLwD5doqq9sbl0Se0JDnUnIa3C7ji88HB8wdA3Jbdw7IHQNyrLU6SlydJXwJfhyynwKWf8vcyF4oYxp3e-JS--IbpuxKwNRSiphTqC7O-B-lv90rqUM</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1627969700</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Using predictive uncertainty analysis to optimise tracer test design and data acquisition</title><source>ScienceDirect Freedom Collection</source><creator>Wallis, Ilka ; Moore, Catherine ; Post, Vincent ; Wolf, Leif ; Martens, Evelien ; Prommer, Henning</creator><creatorcontrib>Wallis, Ilka ; Moore, Catherine ; Post, Vincent ; Wolf, Leif ; Martens, Evelien ; Prommer, Henning</creatorcontrib><description>•We investigate a field-scale injection trial of coal seam gas co-produced water.•We use numerical simulations to establish impact of injection.•We analyse the worth of field data to maximise reliability of impact assessment.•We use “data worth analysis” to optimise monitoring for the site.•We establish monitoring strategy which provides greatest return on investment.
Tracer injection tests are regularly-used tools to identify and characterise flow and transport mechanisms in aquifers. Examples of practical applications are manifold and include, among others, managed aquifer recharge schemes, aquifer thermal energy storage systems and, increasingly important, the disposal of produced water from oil and shale gas wells. The hydrogeological and geochemical data collected during the injection tests are often employed to assess the potential impacts of injection on receptors such as drinking water wells and regularly serve as a basis for the development of conceptual and numerical models that underpin the prediction of potential impacts.
As all field tracer injection tests impose substantial logistical and financial efforts, it is crucial to develop a solid a-priori understanding of the value of the various monitoring data to select monitoring strategies which provide the greatest return on investment.
In this study, we demonstrate the ability of linear predictive uncertainty analysis (i.e. “data worth analysis”) to quantify the usefulness of different tracer types (bromide, temperature, methane and chloride as examples) and head measurements in the context of a field-scale aquifer injection trial of coal seam gas (CSG) co-produced water. Data worth was evaluated in terms of tracer type, in terms of tracer test design (e.g., injection rate, duration of test and the applied measurement frequency) and monitoring disposition to increase the reliability of injection impact assessments. This was followed by an uncertainty targeted Pareto analysis, which allowed the interdependencies of cost and predictive reliability for alternative monitoring campaigns to be compared directly.
For the evaluated injection test, the data worth analysis assessed bromide as superior to head data and all other tracers during early sampling times. However, with time, chloride became a more suitable tracer to constrain simulations of physical transport processes, followed by methane. Temperature data was assessed as the least informative of the solute tracers. However, taking costs of data acquisition into account, it could be shown that temperature data when used in conjunction with other tracers was a valuable and cost-effective marker species due to temperatures low cost to worth ratio. In contrast, the high costs of acquisition of methane data compared to its muted worth, highlighted methanes unfavourable return on investment. Areas of optimal monitoring bore position as well as optimal numbers of bores for the investigated injection site were also established.
The proposed tracer test optimisation is done through the application of common use groundwater flow and transport models in conjunction with publicly available tools for predictive uncertainty analysis to provide modelers and practitioners with a powerful yet efficient and cost effective tool which is generally applicable and easily transferrable from the present study to many applications beyond the case study of injection of treated CSG produced water.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0022-1694</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1879-2707</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2014.04.061</identifier><identifier>CODEN: JHYDA7</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Kidlington: Elsevier B.V</publisher><subject>Aquifers ; Coal seam gas ; Data worth ; Design engineering ; Earth sciences ; Earth, ocean, space ; Exact sciences and technology ; Hydrogeology ; Hydrology. Hydrogeology ; Linear predictive uncertainty analysis ; Mathematical models ; Methane ; Monitoring ; Optimisation ; Optimization ; Pareto analysis ; Tracer tests ; Tracers ; Uncertainty</subject><ispartof>Journal of hydrology (Amsterdam), 2014-07, Vol.515, p.191-204</ispartof><rights>2014 Elsevier B.V.</rights><rights>2015 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-a461t-2489cdbd36c0b97f52f42586d06a28ebce0186e9dd97b791351dc13ad46516623</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-a461t-2489cdbd36c0b97f52f42586d06a28ebce0186e9dd97b791351dc13ad46516623</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=28534688$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Wallis, Ilka</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Moore, Catherine</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Post, Vincent</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wolf, Leif</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Martens, Evelien</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Prommer, Henning</creatorcontrib><title>Using predictive uncertainty analysis to optimise tracer test design and data acquisition</title><title>Journal of hydrology (Amsterdam)</title><description>•We investigate a field-scale injection trial of coal seam gas co-produced water.•We use numerical simulations to establish impact of injection.•We analyse the worth of field data to maximise reliability of impact assessment.•We use “data worth analysis” to optimise monitoring for the site.•We establish monitoring strategy which provides greatest return on investment.
Tracer injection tests are regularly-used tools to identify and characterise flow and transport mechanisms in aquifers. Examples of practical applications are manifold and include, among others, managed aquifer recharge schemes, aquifer thermal energy storage systems and, increasingly important, the disposal of produced water from oil and shale gas wells. The hydrogeological and geochemical data collected during the injection tests are often employed to assess the potential impacts of injection on receptors such as drinking water wells and regularly serve as a basis for the development of conceptual and numerical models that underpin the prediction of potential impacts.
As all field tracer injection tests impose substantial logistical and financial efforts, it is crucial to develop a solid a-priori understanding of the value of the various monitoring data to select monitoring strategies which provide the greatest return on investment.
In this study, we demonstrate the ability of linear predictive uncertainty analysis (i.e. “data worth analysis”) to quantify the usefulness of different tracer types (bromide, temperature, methane and chloride as examples) and head measurements in the context of a field-scale aquifer injection trial of coal seam gas (CSG) co-produced water. Data worth was evaluated in terms of tracer type, in terms of tracer test design (e.g., injection rate, duration of test and the applied measurement frequency) and monitoring disposition to increase the reliability of injection impact assessments. This was followed by an uncertainty targeted Pareto analysis, which allowed the interdependencies of cost and predictive reliability for alternative monitoring campaigns to be compared directly.
For the evaluated injection test, the data worth analysis assessed bromide as superior to head data and all other tracers during early sampling times. However, with time, chloride became a more suitable tracer to constrain simulations of physical transport processes, followed by methane. Temperature data was assessed as the least informative of the solute tracers. However, taking costs of data acquisition into account, it could be shown that temperature data when used in conjunction with other tracers was a valuable and cost-effective marker species due to temperatures low cost to worth ratio. In contrast, the high costs of acquisition of methane data compared to its muted worth, highlighted methanes unfavourable return on investment. Areas of optimal monitoring bore position as well as optimal numbers of bores for the investigated injection site were also established.
The proposed tracer test optimisation is done through the application of common use groundwater flow and transport models in conjunction with publicly available tools for predictive uncertainty analysis to provide modelers and practitioners with a powerful yet efficient and cost effective tool which is generally applicable and easily transferrable from the present study to many applications beyond the case study of injection of treated CSG produced water.</description><subject>Aquifers</subject><subject>Coal seam gas</subject><subject>Data worth</subject><subject>Design engineering</subject><subject>Earth sciences</subject><subject>Earth, ocean, space</subject><subject>Exact sciences and technology</subject><subject>Hydrogeology</subject><subject>Hydrology. Hydrogeology</subject><subject>Linear predictive uncertainty analysis</subject><subject>Mathematical models</subject><subject>Methane</subject><subject>Monitoring</subject><subject>Optimisation</subject><subject>Optimization</subject><subject>Pareto analysis</subject><subject>Tracer tests</subject><subject>Tracers</subject><subject>Uncertainty</subject><issn>0022-1694</issn><issn>1879-2707</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2014</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqNkU9rGzEQxUVJoY7bj1DQJZDLOhqt_p5CCUlbMOTSHHoSsqRNx2x2HUkO-NtXxqbXZhiYy2_mPeYR8hXYChiom-1q--cQ8zyuOAOxYq0VfCALMNp2XDN9QRaMcd6BsuITuSxly1r1vViQ308Fp2e6yyliqPiW6H4KKVePUz1QP_nxULDQOtN5V_EFS6I1-0bQmkqlMRV8nhoXafTVUx9e91iw4jx9Jh8HP5b05TyX5Onh_tfdj279-P3n3bd154WC2nFhbIib2KvANlYPkg-CS6MiU56btAmJgVHJxmj1RlvoJcQAvY9CSVCK90tyfbq7y_PrvplyzWVI4-inNO-LAwvWSmv0O1AlOJcMJLwD5doqq9sbl0Se0JDnUnIa3C7ji88HB8wdA3Jbdw7IHQNyrLU6SlydJXwJfhyynwKWf8vcyF4oYxp3e-JS--IbpuxKwNRSiphTqC7O-B-lv90rqUM</recordid><startdate>20140716</startdate><enddate>20140716</enddate><creator>Wallis, Ilka</creator><creator>Moore, Catherine</creator><creator>Post, Vincent</creator><creator>Wolf, Leif</creator><creator>Martens, Evelien</creator><creator>Prommer, Henning</creator><general>Elsevier B.V</general><general>Elsevier</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QH</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7TG</scope><scope>7UA</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>F1W</scope><scope>H96</scope><scope>KL.</scope><scope>L.G</scope><scope>SOI</scope><scope>7SU</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>KR7</scope><scope>H97</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20140716</creationdate><title>Using predictive uncertainty analysis to optimise tracer test design and data acquisition</title><author>Wallis, Ilka ; Moore, Catherine ; Post, Vincent ; Wolf, Leif ; Martens, Evelien ; Prommer, Henning</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a461t-2489cdbd36c0b97f52f42586d06a28ebce0186e9dd97b791351dc13ad46516623</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2014</creationdate><topic>Aquifers</topic><topic>Coal seam gas</topic><topic>Data worth</topic><topic>Design engineering</topic><topic>Earth sciences</topic><topic>Earth, ocean, space</topic><topic>Exact sciences and technology</topic><topic>Hydrogeology</topic><topic>Hydrology. Hydrogeology</topic><topic>Linear predictive uncertainty analysis</topic><topic>Mathematical models</topic><topic>Methane</topic><topic>Monitoring</topic><topic>Optimisation</topic><topic>Optimization</topic><topic>Pareto analysis</topic><topic>Tracer tests</topic><topic>Tracers</topic><topic>Uncertainty</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Wallis, Ilka</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Moore, Catherine</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Post, Vincent</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wolf, Leif</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Martens, Evelien</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Prommer, Henning</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Aqualine</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Meteorological & Geoastrophysical Abstracts</collection><collection>Water Resources Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>ASFA: Aquatic Sciences and Fisheries Abstracts</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 2: Ocean Technology, Policy & Non-Living Resources</collection><collection>Meteorological & Geoastrophysical Abstracts - Academic</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) Professional</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Civil Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Aquatic Science & Fisheries Abstracts (ASFA) 3: Aquatic Pollution & Environmental Quality</collection><jtitle>Journal of hydrology (Amsterdam)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Wallis, Ilka</au><au>Moore, Catherine</au><au>Post, Vincent</au><au>Wolf, Leif</au><au>Martens, Evelien</au><au>Prommer, Henning</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Using predictive uncertainty analysis to optimise tracer test design and data acquisition</atitle><jtitle>Journal of hydrology (Amsterdam)</jtitle><date>2014-07-16</date><risdate>2014</risdate><volume>515</volume><spage>191</spage><epage>204</epage><pages>191-204</pages><issn>0022-1694</issn><eissn>1879-2707</eissn><coden>JHYDA7</coden><abstract>•We investigate a field-scale injection trial of coal seam gas co-produced water.•We use numerical simulations to establish impact of injection.•We analyse the worth of field data to maximise reliability of impact assessment.•We use “data worth analysis” to optimise monitoring for the site.•We establish monitoring strategy which provides greatest return on investment.
Tracer injection tests are regularly-used tools to identify and characterise flow and transport mechanisms in aquifers. Examples of practical applications are manifold and include, among others, managed aquifer recharge schemes, aquifer thermal energy storage systems and, increasingly important, the disposal of produced water from oil and shale gas wells. The hydrogeological and geochemical data collected during the injection tests are often employed to assess the potential impacts of injection on receptors such as drinking water wells and regularly serve as a basis for the development of conceptual and numerical models that underpin the prediction of potential impacts.
As all field tracer injection tests impose substantial logistical and financial efforts, it is crucial to develop a solid a-priori understanding of the value of the various monitoring data to select monitoring strategies which provide the greatest return on investment.
In this study, we demonstrate the ability of linear predictive uncertainty analysis (i.e. “data worth analysis”) to quantify the usefulness of different tracer types (bromide, temperature, methane and chloride as examples) and head measurements in the context of a field-scale aquifer injection trial of coal seam gas (CSG) co-produced water. Data worth was evaluated in terms of tracer type, in terms of tracer test design (e.g., injection rate, duration of test and the applied measurement frequency) and monitoring disposition to increase the reliability of injection impact assessments. This was followed by an uncertainty targeted Pareto analysis, which allowed the interdependencies of cost and predictive reliability for alternative monitoring campaigns to be compared directly.
For the evaluated injection test, the data worth analysis assessed bromide as superior to head data and all other tracers during early sampling times. However, with time, chloride became a more suitable tracer to constrain simulations of physical transport processes, followed by methane. Temperature data was assessed as the least informative of the solute tracers. However, taking costs of data acquisition into account, it could be shown that temperature data when used in conjunction with other tracers was a valuable and cost-effective marker species due to temperatures low cost to worth ratio. In contrast, the high costs of acquisition of methane data compared to its muted worth, highlighted methanes unfavourable return on investment. Areas of optimal monitoring bore position as well as optimal numbers of bores for the investigated injection site were also established.
The proposed tracer test optimisation is done through the application of common use groundwater flow and transport models in conjunction with publicly available tools for predictive uncertainty analysis to provide modelers and practitioners with a powerful yet efficient and cost effective tool which is generally applicable and easily transferrable from the present study to many applications beyond the case study of injection of treated CSG produced water.</abstract><cop>Kidlington</cop><pub>Elsevier B.V</pub><doi>10.1016/j.jhydrol.2014.04.061</doi><tpages>14</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0022-1694 |
ispartof | Journal of hydrology (Amsterdam), 2014-07, Vol.515, p.191-204 |
issn | 0022-1694 1879-2707 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1919959872 |
source | ScienceDirect Freedom Collection |
subjects | Aquifers Coal seam gas Data worth Design engineering Earth sciences Earth, ocean, space Exact sciences and technology Hydrogeology Hydrology. Hydrogeology Linear predictive uncertainty analysis Mathematical models Methane Monitoring Optimisation Optimization Pareto analysis Tracer tests Tracers Uncertainty |
title | Using predictive uncertainty analysis to optimise tracer test design and data acquisition |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-06T22%3A52%3A35IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Using%20predictive%20uncertainty%20analysis%20to%20optimise%20tracer%20test%20design%20and%20data%20acquisition&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20hydrology%20(Amsterdam)&rft.au=Wallis,%20Ilka&rft.date=2014-07-16&rft.volume=515&rft.spage=191&rft.epage=204&rft.pages=191-204&rft.issn=0022-1694&rft.eissn=1879-2707&rft.coden=JHYDA7&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2014.04.061&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1642250151%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a461t-2489cdbd36c0b97f52f42586d06a28ebce0186e9dd97b791351dc13ad46516623%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1627969700&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |