Відео

[STRENG GEHEIM]

Funny clock man, verify your clock

Is this a TNO reference?

excellent lecture

Super Anitha... Danke!

Great project to generate and store green energy on the form of H2. Believe as of today the project has advanced. Many challenges are on the project based on short or long term forecast. Generating 3000 TWh to 4000 TWh on 2050 and storing 1200 TWh on 2050 on green H2 will need production of 43330-5774 TWh per year electricity. During 2023 world renewable energy from wind and solar was around 3000 TWh and EU may have contributed 250 TWh solar and around 420 TWh from wind (believe these are correct). Europe must increase green energy by 6 times within 27 years and convert the green electricity on green H2. Hope this project will reach the goals, but hard to believe that these will be economical. The H2 storing on depleted gas natural reservoirs may be achieved, but this will reduce the energy efficiency to as low as 20% or less. Then what about the cost?

Hi Miss Okaroafor. How may I get your contact ma'am? I'm working on a project in the Philippines for NG and H2 underground storage.

Is this Serpentine as in the asbestos rock?

Great talk! Thank you very much for sharing!

Well I Guess I haven't seen this. 🤔

This is awesome

ركز بالمقطع ي عريك

Beste mevrouw Muntendam - Bos. Ik heb vandaag zitten lezen in de verslagen van de enquete. Vooral uw werk in “Boek 3” heeft mij tot tranen geroerd. Mijn oprechte dank voor al uw inspanningen!

Thanks for sharing

For more information on the topics in this talk, please see the website of the Forian's research group: www.cg3.rwth-aachen.de/ and follow him on Twitter @flohorovicic or on ResearchGate

In the response to the second question, the shallow depth of the earthquakes and the presence of soft soils (and their amplifying effect) were stated as causes of "significant ground motions" from these small-magnitude earthquakes. This does not tally with the abundant database of recordings of ground motions from these earthquakes obtained on the dense strong-motion recording networks, which show quite unremarkable levels of motion. Indeed, the motions recorded in Groningen are lower than those recorded in the Roswinkel field, despite the firmer ground conditions in the Roswinkel region, and if we compare the recorded motions with predictions from a GMPE derived from small-magnitude event recordings in California (Atkinson, 2015), the Groningen shaking levels are half of those predicted. The shallow focus of the earthquakes leads to lower stress parameters (hence lower motions) and the high-velocity Zechstein formation above the as reservoir causes refraction of the waves that leads to rapid attenuation of the seismic waves. And although there are soft soils that will tend to amplify the motion, the thickness of these deposits may also have caused reduction of the motions due to their high damping. All the evidence and data do suggest that Groningen ground motions are exceptional but only in terms of being lower than those from other earthquakes of comparable size.

Very inspiering. Thank you. 😊

too much about fracture reservoirs instead of the whole picture of simulation.

👏👏👏👏👏

👏👏👏

👍🏽👍🏽👍🏽

🕶🍾👋

100th like😍

Hoi Pap 👋

Question from Anonymous Viewer: 1- According to your conclusions, " A fully coupled poroelastic model of the storage complex is necessary to correctly interpret pressure signals above the injection zone." Isn't it better to consider equilibrium equations ? a- The weight of the overhead on the caprock in both anticline and non-anticline models? (with or without earthquake faults.) b- If the shape of the caprock is considered anticline or non-anticline , considering that in the anticline position, the caprock bears its weight as a compressive force and in the non-anticline position as a tensile force, the effect of increasing the stored CO2 gas pressure is definitely the above two will be different. ( If there are small pores in the caprock or there are faults.) 2- Isn`t it better to consider the real model instead of the 22x12x6km ( Compositional geomechanics subsurface mode) to examine its weaknesses? ( In terms of thickness change or material or etc.) 3- Do you have a plan to seal the gaps in the faults? Answers: 1- The poroelastic model solves for equilibrium equations. (a-b) Yes, the absolute stresses and changes would be different in anticline model and the measured location, but overall trends would remain. 2- For sure you will need a "tailored" model to make accurate conclusions about a specific field case. Here I show results of 4 field cases with different geometry and rock properties and compare to general trends of the simplified model. We are thinking about repeating the study for each specific case. 3- We have some ideas in progress. Thanks! DNE

Thanks a lot for this initiative.

Thank you for this great initiative!

Fantastic talk, thank you!

This is a wonderful video as a memo for growth of this channel since pandemic. Keep up with the good contents!

Thank you very much for this useful series that keep us up to date in the field of geo-energy

to determine the fault map, you must map the top/base of the woodford, and the isopach of the woodford, and youll see the basement faults. Overlay the isopach with the structure of the top and base and delineate trends.

Very interesting.

Appreciate the work you guys do!! Ur the future!!

Amazing work Gioia, I found it very useful esp the synergy between traditional oil and gas estimation to geoenergy potential calculations. You made it sound very easy! :)

Nice presentation, Dr.Kamal

Is there any software which can be used to plot porosity vs time at a particular sintering temperature?

Very informative!

amazing talk , is the slides available for sharing ?

Hello - Can you help on how dolomite will affect plumbing in areas that have dolomite. Can you help explain to a group of plumbers in a simple manner. Thank you.

I was inspired by Singh's work on investigating fluid flow dynamics in both 2D and 3D. Thanks you all so much !!

Very clear and inspiring overview of Shell's energy transition strategy. Thanks Paul!

The dutch translations in the slides and spoken work symultanius subtitels are OK.

For Shell Scenarios please visit this link: www.shell.com/energy-and-innovation/the-energy-future/scenarios.html and, in particular, the Sky scenario can be found here: www.shell.com/energy-and-innovation/the-energy-future/scenarios/shell-scenario-sky.html

You can download Chris' slides from here: surfdrive.surf.nl/files/index.php/s/H8K9khXkdh4WwZv

Link to Jef's own UA-cam Channel bit.ly/34l0GIH

HI, I apologize that I did not have time to answer all questions. Here, I have tried to add more detailed answers: - saurav bhattacharjee : We had an implementation of MEOR in MRST developed in 2015 by Aleksander Amundsen. Unfortunately, although the code is still available, the implementation has not been kept up to date and is thus no longer part of the official release. If you consult www.sintef.no/projectweb/mrst/publications/master-theses/, you can find link to relevant theses that use MRST to simulate MEOR: Andrea Tronstad Lønn (Univ Bergen), Jiayi Cao (Univ. Calgary), Dayo Akindipe (NTNU), and Aleksander Amundsen (NTNU). - Sorin Pop: Yes, you are right that the expression on slide 16 may not be 100% rigorous. However, if you look at slide 17, you see how this is used when the discrete gradient operator is part of a relevant equation. Regarding your second question: yes, you can approximate K grad(p) when K is anisotropic, but then you should must pre-multiply by a multipoint transmissibility rather than the two-point transmissibility to get a consistent discretization. - Serveh Naderi : I know you have been in contact with one of my colleagues regarding your problems with hysteresis. As far as I understand, we are still waiting for your response on some questions we asked in order to locate the problem experienced. That said, the support for hysteresis is not optimal, but our hope is that we soon will be able to release new and significantly improved functionality developed by the Juanes Research Group at MIT (in collaboration with my colleague, Olav Møyner). - Kishan Kumar: the vemmech module implements a virtual element method (VEM) for linear elasticity and poro eleasticity. The VEM method is also used in the ad-mechanics module solve the equations of linear elasticity coupled to standard reservoir flow model. Likewise, the fvbiot (or fvunsat) module implements the multipoint stress-approximation (MPSA) scheme. - Fabricio Sousa: there are already many groups that have contributed to add new methods to MRST; one example is Sebastian Geiger's Carbonate group. In my opinion, the best way to do this is by first writing an email, and then we can take it from there. We are usually quite willing to answer questions, provide advice, and help to review or unify the code so that it fits well with the reset of the software.

For anyone interested in MRST I suggest you check out our webpage at www.mrst.no where you can find the open access MRST book, the user forum, documentation and of course download MRST itself!

Good evening to all

Thanks. Could you make a video about well log correlation for reservoir and interpret depositional environment please?

Is it possible to upload and share slides and full-text references?