Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

A geophysical perspective of value of information: examples of spatial decisions for groundwater sustainability

  • Published:
Environment Systems and Decisions Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The value of information (VOI) can be used to determine what kind of spatial information maybe relevant and useful for groundwater sustainability decisions. In this paper, the unique challenges for applying VoI to spatial information from geophysical data are described. The uncertainty regarding the spatial structure or continuity of the subsurface properties can be described with geostatistical sample models. Using these models, one can quantify the prior value given our present state of uncertainty and a set of decision alternatives and outcomes. Because geophysical techniques are a type of remote-sensing data, assuming “perfect” information is not realistic since the techniques usually are indirectly sampling the aquifer properties. Therefore, the focus of this paper is describing how the data reliability (the measure of imperfectness) can be quantified. One of the foremost considerations is the non-unique relationship between geological parameters (which determine groundwater flow) and geophysical observables (what determines the response of the technique). Another is to have the information in a form such that it is useful for spatial decisions. This will often require inversion and interpretation of the geophysical data. Inversion reconstructs an image of the subsurface from the raw geophysical data. How closely the image reproduces the true subsurface structure or property of interest depends on the particular technique’s resolution, depth of investigation and sensor locations. Lastly, in some cases, interpretation of the geophysical data or inversion will be necessary to link the data to the variables that determine the outcome of the decision. Three examples are provided that illustrate different approaches and methods for addressing these challenges. In the examples, time-domain electromagnetic and electrical resistivity techniques are evaluated for their ability to assist in spatial decisions for aquifer management. The examples considered address these three situations: aquifer vulnerability to surface–borne contaminants, managed aquifer recharge and CO2/brine leakage (related to CO2 geologic sequestration activities). The methods presented here are transferable to other subsurface sciences and decisions that involve risk. Recent work has been applied to geothermal well-siting using electromagnetic techniques. These approaches can also be applied for oil and mining spatial decisions, and they offer advantages over previous VOI work done for oil applications: they explicitly include the geologic uncertainty modeling and simulate the physics of the considered geophysical technique.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Auken E, Christiansen A, Jacobsen L, Sørensen K (2008) A resolution study of buried valleys using laterally constrained inversion of TEM data. J Appl Geophys 65:10–20

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ayers RS (1977) Quality of water for irrigation. J Irrig Drain Div 103:140

    Google Scholar 

  • Bhattacharjya D, Eidsvik J, Mukerji T (2010) The value of information in spatial decision making. Math Geosci 42:141–163

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bhattacharjya D, Eidsvik J, Mukerji T (2013) The value of information in portfolio problems with dependent projects. Decis Anal. doi:10.1287/deca.2013.0277

  • Bickel JE (2008) The relationship between perfect and imperfect information in a two-action risk-sensitive problem. Decis Anal 5(3):116–128

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blakely R (1995) Potential theory in gravity and magnetic applications. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, p 441

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bratvold RB, Bickel JE, Risk A, Lohne HP (2009) Value of information in the oil and gas industry: past, present, and future. Soc Pet Eng Reserv Eval Eng. doi:10.2118/110378-PA

  • Cheng R, Wang H, Shi L, Sun Z, Tian H (2013). Drilling risk management in offshore China: insights and lessons learned from the deepwater horizon incident. In: 6th international petroleum technology conference, Mar 26–28, Beijing, China

  • Christiansen A (2003) Application of airborne TEM methods in Denmark and layered 2D inversion resistivity data. University of Århus, Denmark

    Google Scholar 

  • Constable SC, Parker RL, Constable CG (1987) Occam’s inversion: a practical algorithm for generating models from electromagnetic sounding data. Geophysics 52(3):289–300

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Coopersmith E, Burkholder M, Schluze J (2006) Value-of-information lookbacks—was the information you gathered really worth getting. In: Society of petroleum engineers (SPE101540)

  • Delquié P (2008) The value of information and intensity of preference. Decis Anal 5(3):129–139

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Deutsch CV, Journel AG (1998) GSLIB geostatistical software library and user’s guide, 2nd edn. Oxford University Press, New York, p 369

    Google Scholar 

  • Dumler T, Shoup D (2011) Wheat cost-return budget in Southeast Kansas. Kansas State University, Agricultural Experiment Station and Cooperative Extension Service, Document MF-992. www.agmanager.info

  • Dumler T, Brien D, Martin K (2011) Center-pivot-irrigated corn cost-return budget in Western Kansas. Kansas State University, Center-Pivot-Irrigated Corn Cost-Return Budget in Western Kansas. Agricultural Experiment Station and Cooperative Extension Service, Document MT-585. www.agmanager.info

  • Eidsvik J, Bhattacharjya D, Mukerji T (2008) Value of information of seismic amplitude and CSEM resistivity. Geophysics 73(4):R59–R69. doi:10.1190/1.2938084

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feyen L, Gorelick S (2005) Framework to evaluate the worth of hydraulic conductivity data for optimal groundwater resources management in ecologically sensitive areas. Water Resour Res 41(3). doi:10.1029/2003WR002901

  • Hilton R (1981) Determinants of information value. Manag Sci 27:57–64

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Houck RT (2004) Predicting the economic impact of acquisition artifacts and noise. Lead Edge 23(10):1024–1031

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Houck RT (2007) Time-lapse seismic repeatability—how much is enough? Lead Edge 26(7):828–834

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howard RA (1966) Information value theory. IEEE Trans Syst Sci Cybern SSC-2(1):22–26

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hu LY, Chugunova T (2008) Multiple-point geostatistics for modeling subsurface heterogeneity: a comprehensive review. Water Resour Res 44(11). doi:10.1029/2008WR006993

  • Koltermann C, Gorelick SM (1996) Heterogeneity in sedimentary deposits: a review and descriptive approaches. Water Resour Res 32(9):2617–2658

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Marcotte D (1996) Variograms/covariances in the frequency domain via the fast Fourier transform. Comput Geosci 22(10):1175–1186

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Michael HA, Li H, Boucher A, Sun T, Caers J, Gorelick SM (2010) Combining geologic-process models and geostatistics for conditional simulation of 3-D subsurface heterogeneity. Water Resour Res 46(5). doi:10.1029/2009WR008414

  • Oristaglio M, Spies B (eds) (1999) Three-dimensional electromagnetics. Society of Exploration Geophysicists, Tulsa, OK

  • Park SK, Van G (1991) Inversion of pole–pole data for 3-D resistivity structure beneath arrays of electrodes. Geophysics 56:951–960

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phillips J, Newman AM, Walls MR (2009) Utilizing a value of information framework to improve ore collection and classification procedures. Eng Econ 54(1):50–74. doi:10.1080/00137910802711883

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raiffa H, Schlaifer R (1961) Applied statistical decision theory. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Reichard E, Evans JS (1989) Assessing the value of hydrogeologic information for risk-based remedial action decisions. Water Resour Res 25(7):1451–1460

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Remy N, Boucher A, Wu J (2009) Applied geostatistics with SGeMS: a users’ guide. Cambridge University Press, New York, p 264

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Rezaie J, Eidsvik J, Mukerji T (under review) Value of information analysis and bayesian inversion for closed skew-normal distributions: applications to seismic amplitude versus offset data. Geophysics

  • Richards M, Kemper J, Jervis A, Taylor M, Clarke C, Turner M, Kelsall N, Puech J (2013) Rank wildcat drilling risks & drilling time reduced in ultra deepwater offshore Namibia with the application of seismic & formation pressure while drilling technology. In T S of P. Engineers (eds) 2013 SPE/IADC drilling conference and exhibition. Amsterdam, The Netherlands. doi:10.2118/163496-MS

  • Sato K (2011) Value of information analysis for adequate monitoring of carbon dioxide storage in geological reservoirs under uncertainty. Int J Greenh Gas Control 5(5):1294–1302. doi:10.1016/j.ijggc.2011.07.010

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Scheidt C, Caers J (2009) Uncertainty quantification in reservoir performance using distances and kernel methods—application to a West-Africa deepwater turbidite reservoir. Soc Pet Eng J 14(4):680–692

    Google Scholar 

  • Strebelle S (2002) Conditional simulation of complex geological structures using multiple-point statistics. Math Geol 34:1–21. doi:10.1023/A:1014009426274

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sun Y, Tong C, Duan Q, Buscheck TA, Blink JA (2011) Combining simulation and emulation for calibrating sequentially reactive transport systems. Transp Porous Media 92(2):509–526. doi:10.1007/s11242-011-9917-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sun Y, Tong C, Trainor-Guitton WJ, Lu C, Mansoor K, Carroll SA (2013) Global sampling for integrating physics-specific subsystems and quantifying uncertainties of CO2 geological sequestration. Int J Greenh Gas Control 12:108–123. doi:10.1016/j.ijggc.2012.10.004

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Suzuki S, Caers J (2008) A distance-based prior model parameterization for constraining solutions of spatial inverse problems. Math Geosci 40(4):445–469

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tester JW, Anderson BJ, Batchelor AS, Blackwell DD, DiPippo R, Drake EM, Veatch RW (2006) The future of geothermal energy, p 372. Retrieved from http://www1.eere.energy.gov/geothermal/egs_technology.html

  • Trainor-Guitton WJ, Caers JK, Mukerji T (2011) A methodology for establishing a data reliability measure for value of spatial information problems. Math Geosci 43(8):929–949. doi:10.1007/s11004-011-9367-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trainor-Guitton WJ, Mukerji T, Knight R (2013a) A methodology for quantifying the value of spatial information for dynamic Earth problems. Stoch Environ Res Risk Assess 27(4):969–983. doi:10.1007/s00477-012-0619-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trainor-Guitton WJ, Ramirez A, Yang X, Mansoor K, Sun Y, Carroll S (2013b) Value of information methodology for assessing the ability of electrical resistivity to detect CO2/brine leakage into a shallow aquifer. Int J Greenh Gas Control 18:101–113. doi:10.1016/j.ijggc.2013.06.018

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Trainor-Guitton WJ, Hoversten GM, Ramirez A, Roberts J, Juliusson E, Key K, Mellors R (under review) The value of spatial information of for determining well placement: a geothermal example. Geophysics

  • Wagner JM, Shamir U, Nemati HR (1992) Groundwater quality management under uncertainty: stochastic programming approaches and the value of information. Water Resour Res 28(5):1233–1246. doi:10.1029/92WR00038

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Yilmaz O (2001) Seismic data analysis. Society of Exploration Geophysicists, Tulsa, OK, p 2027

  • Zoback MD, Gorelick SM (2012) Earthquake triggering and large-scale geologic storage of carbon dioxide. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 109(26):10164–10168. doi:10.1073/pnas.1202473109

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

I would like to acknowledge my co-authors from the original papers for the three examples synthesized here: Abelardo Ramirez, Xianjin Yang, Yunwei Sun, Kayyum Mansoor, Susan Carroll, Jef Caers, Tapan Mukerji and Rosemary Knight. This research was performed under the auspices of the US Department of Energy by Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory under Contract DE-AC52-07NA27344.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, CA, USA

    Whitney J. Trainor-Guitton

Authors
  1. Whitney J. Trainor-Guitton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Whitney J. Trainor-Guitton.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 1452 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Trainor-Guitton, W.J. A geophysical perspective of value of information: examples of spatial decisions for groundwater sustainability. Environ Syst Decis 34, 124–133 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10669-013-9487-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10669-013-9487-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation