MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408484582 · doi:10.5194/egusphere-egu25-20581

Evaluation of seismic monitoring methods from the Aquistore CO2 storage site in Canada

2025· preprint· en· W4408484582 on OpenAlexaffabout
Don White, Thomas K Asafuah, Amir Mardan, Gilles Bellefleur

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicSeismology and Earthquake Studies
Canadian institutionsGeological Survey of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceGeologySeismology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Aquistore CO2 storage site lies within the Williston Basin in southeastern Saskatchewan, Canada. The storage reservoir is a 200 m thick saline clastic formation at a depth of 3150 m. 600,000 tonnes of CO2 have been injected at the site since 2015. A variety of geophysical monitoring methods have been employed at the Aquistore site. The primary tools for tracking the evolution of the CO2 plume over time are time-lapse (4D) seismic acquired with a permanent 2D array of shallow buried geophones and VSPs using a well-based distributed acoustic sensing (DAS) cable. 3D surface seismic and VSPs have been acquired when injected CO2 amounts were 0, 36, 102, 141, and 272 ktonnes, respectively [1,2], with the most recent surveys conducted in November, 2023 when 566,000 tonnes of  CO2 were injected. The 4D seismic data image a primary CO2  plume within a ~10 m thick high-permeability zone. The plume has continued to expand in sequential 4D images with an interpreted structural flexure/basement fault significantly affecting the flow of CO2 away from the injection well.Other geophysical monitoring methods that have been utilized at the Aquistore site include crosswell seismic tomography and DAS surface seismic acquisition using novel fibre cable configurations. Time-lapse crosswell seismic reflection and velocity images have been obtained using full waveform inversion and VSP-reflection imaging techniques. The observed CO2-related velocity changes are particularly important as they provide a means of calibrating the surface seismic data. Following an initial test of fibre optic cable configurations for surface seismic acquisition [3], a large-scale field test of shallow vertical fibre loops was conducted in November-2023 to record a full 3D dynamite seismic survey at the Aquistore site. A total of 8000 m of tactical optical fibre cable was buried at 80 cm depth along 6 receiver lines of the existing permanent geophone array at the site with the fibre forming a continuous run with 3 m vertical loops installed adjacent to the geophones along the line for a total of 95 spatially coincident fibre loops and geophones. Results from this survey demonstrate comparable imaging results for the data from the geophones and fibre loops.References[1] Roach, L.A.N., and White, D.J., 2018. Evolution of a deep CO2 plume from time-lapse seismic imaging at the Aquistore Storage Site, Saskatchewan, Canada, International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 74, 79-86.[2] Movahedzadeh, Z., Rangriz Shokri, A., Chalaturnyk, R., Nickel, E., and Sacuta, N., 2021. Measurement, monitoring, verification and modelling at the Aquistore CO2 storage site, First Break, 39(2), 69-75.[3] White, D.J., Bellefleur, G., Dodds, K., and Movahedzadeh, Z., 2022. Toward Improved DAS Sensitivity for Surface-Based Reflection Seismics: Configuration Tests at the Aquistore CO2 Storage Site, Geophysics, 87(2), 1-14.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.463
Threshold uncertainty score0.596

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.063
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.280 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSeismology and Earthquake StudiesFrench-language works237,207