Production Scenario "Basispad Kabinet"
Yüklə 9,41 Mb. Pdf görüntüsü
|
- Bu səhifədəki naviqasiya:
- Year P(M>=3.6) P(M>=4.0) P(M>=4.5) P(M>=5.0)
- Production Scenario “Basispad Kabinet” - Average Temperature
- Production Scenario Basisspad Kabinet Average Temperature
Seismic Risk Assessment for Production Scenario “Basispad Kabinet” for the Groningen field - June 2018 44
Year P(M>=3.6) P(M>=4.0) P(M>=4.5) P(M>=5.0) 2018
16.0%
6.6% 1.6%
0.4%
2019
17.0%
7.0% 1.6%
0.4%
2020
17.8%
7.5% 1.8%
0.4%
2021
19.3%
8.0% 1.9%
0.5%
2022
20.2%
8.7% 2.2%
0.6%
Table 4.2 Table with annual probabilities for occurrence of earthquakes exceeding a set magnitude Taken from “Hazard, Building Damage and Risk Assessment – November 2017” (Ref. 2).
Seismic Risk Assessment for Production Scenario “Basispad Kabinet” for the Groningen field - June 2018 45
4.2 Hazard Assessment Hazard maps have been prepared for each year of the next ten calendar years and for the next three 5-year periods. Separate hazard maps are available for the “Basispad Kabinet” at average temperature profile, cold temperature profile and warm temperature profile. The hazard map for the average temperature weather scenario for each year of the period 2018 to 2027 is shown in figure 4.3 a, b, c. The hazard is, as expected based on the declining gas production profile, also decreasing over this period. The trend in the largest PGA in these annual hazard maps is shown in figure 4.4. However, this reduction is not evenly spread over all areas of the field. In the later years, the hazard is primarily located in the area North-East of Loppersum. This is consistent with the equilibration of reservoir pressures during these later years. The gas from the higher-pressure area to the North-West of Loppersum will continue to flow to the lower pressure South-Eastern area, causing a continued decrease of pressure in the former area. This effect of gas flow within the reservoir due to equilibration of pressure differences is referred to as the “remweg” effect. In theoretical remweg production scenarios this effect (Ref. 1) has also been demonstrated. The effect can also be seen in Figure 4-5, showing in the upper row the hazard maps of the “Basispad Kabinet” production scenario for the next three 5-year periods. The lower row shows the hazard maps for the 24 Bcm/year scenario of November 2017 for the next two 5-year periods for comparison. In Figure 4-6 the Hazard map for the 5- year period 2018 to 2022 is shown in larger format.
Seismic Risk Assessment for Production Scenario “Basispad Kabinet” for the Groningen field - June 2018 46
2018
2019
2020 2021
Figure 4.3a Hazard Maps for the average temperature weather scenario for the years 2018 (top – left), 2019 (top – right), 2020, (bottom – left) and 2021 (bottom – right). Seismic Risk Assessment for Production Scenario “Basispad Kabinet” for the Groningen field - June 2018 47
2022 2023
2024 2025 Figure 4.3b Hazard Maps for the average temperature weather scenario for the years 2022 (top – left), 2023 (top – right), 2024, (bottom – left) and 2025 (bottom – right). Seismic Risk Assessment for Production Scenario “Basispad Kabinet” for the Groningen field - June 2018 48
2026 2027
Figure 4.3c Hazard Maps for the average temperature weather scenario for the years 2026 (left) and 2027 (right). Production Scenario “Basispad Kabinet” - Average Temperature
Development over time of the largest PGA in the hazard maps. The grey line denotes the largest PGA in the two 5-year hazard maps of the 24 Bcm/year scenario. The red line denotes the largest PGA in the three 5-year hazard maps of the “Basispad Kabinet” scenario. The blue line denotes the largest PGA in the ten 1-year hazard maps of the “Basispad Kabinet” scenario. 0 0,05 0,1 0,15
0,2 0,25
2016 2018
2020 2022
2024 2026
2028 2030
2032 2034
La rg es t P G A in
Ha za rd M a p [f ra cti o n o f g]
Average Temperature 1-Year Average 5-Year Average 5-Year Average Yüklə 9,41 Mb. Dostları ilə paylaş:
|