Izvestiya, Atmospheric and Oceanic Physics

, Volume 46, Issue 8, pp 952–964 | Cite as

Regional geodynamic monitoring system for ensuring safety in geological and exploratory production of oil and gas

Article

Abstract

Global geodynamic processes have a significant influence on the tempo of human society development and can cause the complete devastation of large areas of the Earth and mass mortality in a number of catastrophic cases. Technogenous factors can sometimes trigger geodynamic events. The potential consequences of natural and technogenous disasters became apparent during the catastrophe on the Deepwater Horizon platform on April 20, 2010. This paper takes a brief look at some aspects of this disaster. The possibilities of preventing the similar events in the future are discussed here. For this purpose, the development of a geodynamics information system (IS-Geodynamics) based on a network of global (subglobal) monitoring of the Earth’s hydrogeodeformation (HGD) field, is suggested.

Keywords

geodynamic processes natural and industrial geodynamic disasters oil and gas prospecting information system geodynamics Earth’s hydrogeodeformation field 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. I. V. Anan’in, “Effect of Recent Tectonic Movements of the Earth’s Crust and Related Geophysical Fields on Accidents in Aviation and Missile Launches,” Geofiz. Prots. Biosfera 6(2), 35–51 (2007).Google Scholar
  2. I. V. Anan’in, “Estimation of Damage Caused by Strong Earthquakes in the European Part of Russia,” Vopr. Inzh. Seismol. 35(3), 39–57 (2008).Google Scholar
  3. S. V. Boldina and G. N. Kopylova, “Hydrogeodynamic Processes in the Well-Reservoir System under Seismic Effects (A Case Study of Well SW-5, Kamchatka),” in Geophysics of the XXI Century: Year 2007. Collected Papers of the Ninth Geophysical V.V. Fedynskii Memorial Lectures (GERS, Tver, 2008), pp. 23–34 [in Russian].Google Scholar
  4. G. S. Vartanyan, “Regional System of Geodynamic Monitoring and the Problems of Sustainable Development of Earthquake-Prone Provinces of the World,” Otech. Geol., No. 2, 37–45 (1999).Google Scholar
  5. G. S. Vartanyan, “Strain Images of Some Earthquakes and Short-Term Earthquake Prediction,” Otech. Geol., No. 4, 68–74 (2008).Google Scholar
  6. G. S. Vartanyan and G. V. Kulikov, “Hydrogeodeformational Field of the Earth,” Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR 262(2), 310–314 (1982).Google Scholar
  7. G. S. Vartanyan, V. A. Garifulin, T. E. Shalina, and N. N. Sharapanov, “Hydrogeodeformational Field during the Spitak Earthquake,” Ofioliti, No. 1, 92–96 (1990).Google Scholar
  8. G. S. Vartanyan, J. D. Bredehoeft, and E. Rouelloffs, “Hydrogeological Research Methods of Tectonic Stress,” Ofioliti, No. 9, 3–12 (1992).Google Scholar
  9. G. S. Vartanyan, O. V. Kristensen, E. Gosk, and E. Tsukuda, “Regional Method of Short-Term Prediction of Strong Earthquakes,” Otech. Geol., No. 1, 3–8 (2002).Google Scholar
  10. G. N. Kopylova, “Changes in water level in the SW-5 Well, Kamchatka, Caused by Earthquakes,” Vulkanol. Seismol., No. 6, 52–64 (2006).Google Scholar
  11. G. N. Kopylova, G. M. Steblov, S. V. Boldina, and I. A. Sdel’nikova, “On the Possibility of Assessments of Coseismic Deformation According to the Level Observations in the Well,” Fiz. Zemli, No. 1, 51–61 (2010).Google Scholar
  12. A. K. Pevnev, “On the Causes of Failure in Solving the Problem of Earthquake Prediction,” in Geophysics of the XXI Century (GERS, Tver, 2007), pp. 244–249 [in Russian].Google Scholar
  13. A. Ya. Sidorin, “Effect of the Sun on Seismicity and Seismic Noise,” Seism. Pribory, No. 40, 71–80 (2004) [Seismic Instruments (Engl. Transl.) 40, 52–59 (2004)].Google Scholar
  14. A. Ya. Sidorin, “Midday Effect in the Time Series of Earthquakes and Seismic Noise,” Dokl. Akad. Nauk 402(6), 822–827 (2005) [Dokl. Earth Sci. 403 (5), 771–776 (2005)].Google Scholar
  15. A. Ya. Sidorin, “Diurnial Periodicity of Strong Earthquakes of Garm Research Area,” Seism. Pribory 44(3), 70–76 (2008) [Seism. Pribory 45, 90–94 (2008)].Google Scholar
  16. A. Ya. Sidorin, “Acrophase of the Daily Periodicity of Earthquakes in Different Time Zones,” Geofiz. Prots. Biosfera 8(3), 56–66 (2009a).Google Scholar
  17. A. Ya. Sidorin, “Sudden Changes in the Pattern of Diurnal Periodicity of Earthquakes in the Garm Test Area during Equinox,” Geofiz. Prots. Biosfera 8(3), 67–78 (2009b).Google Scholar
  18. A. Ya. Sidorin, “Application of the Rayleigh-Schuster Method in Studies of Periodicity of Earthquakes,” Seism. Pribory 45(3), 29–40 (2009c).Google Scholar
  19. A. Ya. Sidorin, “Diurnal Periodicity of Earthquakes in Greece,” Seism. Pribory 45(3), 60–76 (2009d).Google Scholar
  20. A. Ya. Sidorin, “Search for Anthropogenic Effects in Time Series of Earthquakes in Greece,” Vopr. Inzh. Seismol. 36(4), 70–76 (2009e).Google Scholar
  21. A. Ya. Sidorin, “Diurnal Periodicity of Earthquakes and Its Seasonal Changes,” Seism. Pribory 45(4), 69–84 (2009f).Google Scholar
  22. W. Madsen, The Cover-up: BP’s Crude Politics and the Looming Environmental Mega-Disaster. http://Oilprise.com. May (2010).
  23. G. S. Vartanyan, “Regional System of Geodynamic Monitoring: Sustainable Development of Seismic-Prone Regions,” in UN Forum on Urban Geology in Asia and the Pacific (Bangkok, 2001), pp. 355–373.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Pleiades Publishing, Ltd. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.ATOX-Canada Inc.TorontoCanada, The Netherlands, Russia

Personalised recommendations