• 1:30 PM Airborne gravity, where can we go from here? – Ed Biegert
• 1:55 PM Exploration geophysics after 100 years: what is left to do? – Craig Beasley
• 2:20 PM The road ahead for near-surface seismology – Oz Yilmaz
• 2:45 PM Next generation challenges in geophysical reservoir monitoring – David Lumley
• 3:10 PM Microseismic for fracture monitoring in shale reservoirs –Peter Duncan
• 3:35 PM The future of rock physics: imaging and computing – Amos Nur
• 4:00 PM Electromagnetics for E&P applications: where are we going from here? – Kurt M. Strack
• 4:25 PM Revealing fluid flow in the reservoir using satellite based measurements of surface deformation – D.W. Vasco*, A. Ferretti, Fabio Rocca

• Joining the Energy Industry: Skills Needed for Success -- Jack Dunn, Earth Science Sponsor, Chevron
• Meeting Industry's Educational Needs in Academia -- Alan Levander, Chair, Earth Science Department, Rice U
• An Independent's Perspective -- Robert Talley, Director, Geoscience Technology, Anadarko
• Survival at a small technical college without a PhD program: Montana Tech. -- Curtis Link, Department Chair, Professor, Montana Tech.
• Breaking Points in Earth and Energy Sciences Research; Driven by Need, Innovations or Access to Funding? -- Ole Martinsen, VP Exploration, Statoil
• Balancing Research and Education in a Research University Environment -- Sharon Mosher, Dean, Jackson School of Geosciences, UT-Austin
• Benefits and challenges of Collaborative Research Between Industry, Academia and Government --Carlos Dengo, VP Geoscience Research, ExxonMobil
• Expanding opportunities and the realities of openness, intellectual property, and research to operations transitions -- John A. Orcutt, Past Deputy of Research, Scripts Inst. of Oceanography
• The Role of Government in Academic and Industrial Research -- Timothy Killeen, Asst. Director, Geosciences, US National Sci. Foundation

• 8:30 AM Origin and advances of the planted 4-C seismic node technology -- Eivind Berg*, Claude Vuillermoz, Gunnar Ekmann and Geir Woje, SeaBird Exploration
• 8:55 AM Imaging the invisible: BP's path to OBS nodes -- Gerard Beaudoin*, BP
• 9:20 AM FairfieldNodal's excellent nodal adventure -- Steve Mitchell*, Cliff Ray, Etienne Marc, David Hays and Ken Craft, FairfieldNodal
• 9:45 AM Experiences with OBS node technology in the Greater Mars Basin -- Frans Smit*, Shell International Exploration and Production
• 10:10 AM Ocean bottom nodes processing: Reconciliation of streamer and OBN data sets for time-lapse seismic monitoring: The Angolan Deep Offshore experience -- Loïc Bovet*, Enrico Ceragioli, Sergio Tchikanha, Jérôme Guilbot, and Sylvain Toinet, Total E&P Angola
• 10:35 AM OBN Acquisition for Reservoir Management and Survellian at Agbami Field, Nigeria -- T George Chou, Chevron Energy Technology Co.; Doug Hicks, Chevron Nigeria Ltd.; Larry Sydora, Chevron Energy Technology Co; Sunkanmi Iyiola, Nche Nworah and Isaac Arowolo, Chevron Nigeria Ltd.
• 11:00 AM Ocean-bottom node seismic: Present challenges and future solutions -- Mark Thompson*, Lasse Amundsen, and Harald Westerdahl, Statoil Research Centre
• 11:25 AM  Acquisition of blended multiple scattering, a new step in OBC -- Guus Berkhout, Delft U of Technology

• 8:30 AM Some applications of near-surface geophysics to earthquake geohazards investigations: Examples from Eastern Ontario, Canada -- James Hunter*, Heather Crow, and Andre Pugin, Geological Survey of Canada; Dariush Motazedian, Carleton U
• 8:55 AM Seismic investigations of subsidence hazards -- Richard D. Miller,* Julian Ivanov, Jianghai Xia, and Shelby L. Peterie, Kansas Geological Survey; Steven L. Sloan, U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center
• 9:20 AM Automated multi-offset ground-penetrating radar data collection for monitoring lab-scale infiltration experiments -- Adam R. Mangel*, Stephen M.J. Moysey, and Jamie C. Ryan, and Joshua A. Tarbutton, Clemson U
• 9:45 AM Locating abandoned coal mines to assess subsidence risk using self-potential and dc resistivity -- Karoline Bohlen* and André Revil, Colorado School of Mines; Nancy House, EnCana Oil & Gas (USA)
• 10:10 AM Archaeological investigations using geophysics at Chimney Rock Great House, Colorado -- Michael A. Mitchell, Sarah G.R. Devriese*, Roxanna N. Frary, and Richard A. Krahenbuhl, Colorado School of Mines; Brenda K. Todd, U of Colorado
• 10:35 AM Role of 3D Seismic for Quantitative Shallow Hazard Assessment in Deep Water Sediments -- Nader C. Datta, Randal W. Utech*, and Dianna Shelander, Schlumberger DCS
• 11:00 AM Sinkholes and Pitfalls in Urban Geophysics -- Thomas L. Dobecki*, SDII Global Corporation
• 11:25 AM Application of Shallow Shear Wave Seismic Reflection Methods in Earthquake Hazards Studies -- Jamie B. Harris*, Millsaps College
• 11: 50 AM Airborne EM Mapping of Rock Slides and Tunneling Hazards -- A. A. Pfaffhuber*, E. Grimstad, and U. Domaas, Norwegian Geotechnical Institute; E. Auken, U of Århus; M. Halkjær, SkyTEM ApS; N. Foged, University of Århus; and Sara Bazin, Norwegian Geotechnical Institute

• 1:30 PM Spatial Sampling Requirements for Seismic Recording:  A Field Experiment in Sirte Basin, Libya -- O. Yilmaz*, Anatolian Geophysical; N. Shibani, NAGECO; M. Zenati, Waha Oil; A. Ozkan, NAGECO; Y. Sakallioglu, Waha Oil
• 1:55 PM 3D symmetric sampling of sparse acquisition geometries -- Gijs J.O. Vermeer, 3DSymSam–Geophysical Advice
• 2:20 PM Reducing infill requirements using Fresnel zone binning and steerable streamers -- David J. Monk*, Apache
• 2:45 PM  Faster, cheaper, better seismic acquisition:  Now you can have all three -- Craig J. Beasley, Emmanuel Saragoussi, Steve Whidden, and Franck Le Diagon
• 3:10 PM Higher resolution seismic imaging using holography -- Enders A. Robinson, Columbia U; Norman S. Neidell, Consulting Geophysicist; Renzo Cividin, Consulting Geophysicist (SS 5.5)              
• 3:35 PM Reconstruction of wide-azimuth seismic data: Assumptions, methodology and field examples -- Mauricio D. Sacchi, U of Alberta; Daniel Trad, CGGVeritas
• 4:00 PM Rank-reduction-based trace interpolation -- Stewart Trickett*, Lynn Burroughs, Andrew Milton, Larry Walton, and Rob Dack, Kelman Technologies
• 4:25 PM Wireless seismic systems -- Jack Caldwell, OYO Geospace

• 1:30 PM Geoscientists without Borders:  SEG Foundation’s program linking students and people in need through humanitarian applications of geophysics – Craig J. Beasley, WesternGeco/Schlumberger
• 1:55 PM Hydrogeophysical investigation for groundwater at the Dayspring Children's Village, South Africa -- Susan J. Webb*, David Ngobeni, Michael Jones, and Tamiru Abiye, U Witwatersrand; Madeline Lee, McMaster U; Nirocca Devkurran and Rachael Goba, U Witwatersrand; Darren Burrows, Fugro Airborne; Louise Pellerin, Green Geophysics
• 2:20 PM The importance of education and outreach in geophysics -- Roel Snieder, Colorado School of Mines
• 2:45 PM Locating groundwater resources for aboriginal communities in remote and arid parts of South Australia -- Graham Heinson, Kent Inverarity* and David Pedler-Jones, U of Adelaide; Adrian Costar, Dept of Water, Land and Biodiversity Conservation, South Australia; Simon Wurst and Grant McLean, South Australian Water Corporation; Craig Simmons, Flinders U of South Australia
• 3:10 PM Student-based archaeological geophysics in northern Thailand -- Emily A. Hinz*, Lee M. Liberty, and Spencer H. Wood, Boise State U; Fongsaward Singharajawarapan and Suwimon Udphuay, Chiang Mai U; Apichart Paiyarom, Deparment of Mineral Resources; Jeffrey Shragge, U of Western Australia
• 3:35 PM Southeast Asia applied geophysics workshop: Geoscientists without borders -- Lee M. Liberty*, Spencer H. Wood, Emily A. Hinz, and Dylan Mikesell, Boise State U; Fongsaward Singharajawarapan, Chiang Mai U; Jeffrey Shragge, U of Western Australia
• 4:00 PM The importance of stakeholders in community-based geophysics programs -- Stephen Moysey*, Clemson U
• 4:25 PM An integrated ground water study for Chasnigua, Honduras: Accomplishments and challenges -- David Munoz and Catherine Skokan, Colorado School of Mines
• 4:50 PM Assessing tectonics and geohazards near Kingston, Jamaica: An initial report -- Matthew J. Hornbach*, Paul Mann and Katie Delbecq, U of Texas at Austin; Charles DeMets and Bryn Benford, U of Wisconsin; Lyndon Brown, U of West Indies

• 8:30 AM 3D Controlled Source Electromagnetic Edge-Based Finite Element Modeling of Conductive and Permeable Structures -- Souvik Mukherjee,* and Mark E. Everett, Dept of Geology and Geophysics, Texas A&M U
• 8:55 AM Advances in electromagnetic modeling based on integral equation methods and their application to 3D inversion of time-domain airborne data – Michael S. Zhdanov*, U of Utah and Technolmaging; Leif H. Cox, Montana Tech and TechnoImaging; and Glenn A. Wilson, TechnoImaging
• 9:20 AM A framework for 3D joint inversion of MT, gravity and seismic refraction data -- Max Moorkamp*, Bjorn Heincke and Marion Jegen, IFM-GEOMAR; Alan W. Roberts and Richard W. Hobbs, Durham U
• 9:45 AM Scalable Nonlinear Inverse Uncertainty Estimation Using Model Reduction, Constraint Mapping, and Sparse Geometric Sampling -- Michael J. Tompkins*, Schlumberger-EMI; Juan L. Fernández-Martínez and Tapan Mukerji, Stanford U; David L. Alumbaugh, Schlumberger-EMI
• 10:10 AM  Inversion of multisource TEM data with applications to Mt. Milligan -- Douglas W. Oldenburg*, Dikun Yang, and Eldad Haber, U of British Columbia
• 10:35 AM  Comparison of sensitivity and resolution with two marine CSEM exploration methods -- David Alumbaugh*, Nestor H. Cuevas, Jiuping Chen, Guozhong Gao and James Brady, Schlumberger
• 11:00 AM  Electromagnetic scattering by thin resistive bodies -- Andrei Swidinsky* and Nigel Edwards, U of Toronto
• 11:25 AM  A parallel goal-oriented adaptive finite element method for 2D marine EM -- Kerry Key*, Scripps Institution of Oceanography; Jeff Ovall, U of Kentucky
• 11:50 AM  Extensional tectonism, magmatic-hydrothermal connections and geothermal systems of the southwestern United States as revealed through magnetotelluric surveying -- Philip E. Wannamaker*, Virginie Maris, and Derrick P. Hasterok, U Utah; William M. Doerner, SourceOne Geophysical

• The effects of rough terrain on land-based controlled-source electromagnetic exploration using a long horizontal dipole source -- Mark S. Hickey* and Mark E. Everett, Dept of Geology & Geophysics, Texas A&M U; Stefan L. Helwig and Vladimir S. Mogilatov, EMTEK
• Stratigraphic Interpretation of GPR Data Using 2D S-Transform--Mehrez Elwaseif, Department of Earth and Environmental Sciences, Rutgers-The State U; Mohamed Khalil, National Research Institute of Astronomy and Geophysics

• 8:30 AM Inversion of multiple intersecting high-resolution crosshole GPR profiles for hydrological characterization -- Baptiste Dafflon* and Warren Barrash, Boise State U; James Irving, U of Guelph
• 8:55 AM Estimation of vadose zone hydraulic properties from geophysical data using a Bayesian framework: Effects of a correlated prior on posterior uncertainties -- Marie Scholer, U of Lausanne; James Irving, U of Guelph; Andrew Binley, Lancaster U; Klaus Holliger*, U of Lausanne
• 9:20 AM Long-term time-lapse surface and borehole electrical resistivity monitoring of natural recharge-induced contaminant plume behavior -- Erika Gasperikova*, Michael B. Kowalsky, Susan S. Hubbard, and John E. Peterson, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory; Gregory S. Baker and Meagan Smith, U of Tennessee; David B. Watson, Oak Ridge National Laboratory
• 9:45 AM Frequency-domain surface nuclear magnetic resonance forward modeling on an adaptive octree mesh -- Trevor Irons*, Colorado School of Mines and USGS; Yaoguo Li, Colorado School of Mines; Jason R. McKenna, U.S. Army Engineer Research & Development Center
• 10:10 AM  Using a real surface conductivity component to estimate hydraulic conductivity -- Mohamed Ahmed Khalil*, and Fernando Monteiro Santos, U de Lisboa
• 10:35 AM  The effect of inhomogeneous surface relaxivity on nuclear magnetic resonance relaxation rates -- Kristina Keating*, Rutgers U
• 11:00 AM  Conditions leading to non-exponential decay of the surface-NMR signal and implications for water content estimation -- Elliot Grunewald* and Rosemary Knight, Stanford U
• 11:25 PM Biogeophysics:  A new frontier in Earth science research" – Estella Atekwana, Oklahoma State U

• 1:30 PM Echoes of the real world -- Klaus Mosegaard, Technical U Denmark
• 1:55 PM On "Wavelengths of earth structures that can be resolved from seismic reflection data" -- Antonio Pica, CGGVeritas
• 2:20 PM Imaging and inversion based upon adjoint methods -- Jeroen Tromp, Princeton U
• 2:45 PM Optimal target-oriented survey designs -- Hugues Djikpesse, Mohamed Khodja, and Michael Prange, Schlumberger-Doll Research
• 3:10 PM Albert Tarantola and the scope of inverse problems -- John A. Scales, Colorado School of Mines
• 3:35 PM Nonlinear inversion of seismic waveforms: A North Sea offset VSP example -- Marwan Charara*, Schlumberger; Christophe Barnes, U de Cergy-Pontoise
• 4:00 PM Waveform inversion: progress and prospects -- William Symes, Rice U
• 4:25 PM How well do you think you know Albert? -- Wafik Beydoun, Total

The main objective of this workshop is to discuss the use and meaning of anisotropy in depth imaging, together with the estimation of its parameter values and their uncertainties.
Over the last 15 years or so, seismic anisotropy has been shown to be critically important in many aspects of oil and gas exploration and development, affecting the accuracy of seismic processing, imaging, and interpretation. In seismic imaging, for example, the inclusion of anisotropy in velocity models and migration algorithms has allowed direct ties to well information in the depth domain, improved the quality and interpretability of seismic images and increased confidence in depth maps.
However, in most cases, it requires extra effort to build anisotropic velocity models and it is certainly not a straightforward process. In particular, inversion of surface seismic data for seismic anisotropy is generally highly non-unique. Therefore, estimation of anisotropy parameters for use in imaging and interpretation typically requires integration of all available additional data, including walkaway VSPs, checkshots, logs and lab measurements, and prior constraints from regional data where available. However, such integration is complex and delicate due to the wide range of frequencies and sampling densities at which measurements are made. This makes the relative weighting of the data and the handling of the effective prior and posterior uncertainties in a joint inversion extremely difficult.

The workshop will discuss:

• The measurement or indirect estimation of seismic anisotropy
• The uncertainty in anisotropy parameter estimation
• The reconciliation of anisotropy measurements at different scales
• The integration of measurements to estimate field-scale models for imaging and characterization
• The root of the anisotropy and the link to the underlying rock physics

• 1:30 ­­pm:  Introduction by Paul Williamson of Total
• 1:40 ­­pm:  Anisotropy in the 21st Century: Resolution and Symmetry – Leon Thomsen, Delta Geophysics
• 2:05 ­­pm:  Data Integration for Estimating Seismic Anisotropy: Practice and Observations – Lorie Bear* and Shiyu Xu, ExxonMobil
• 2:30 ­­pm:  Quantifying Value of VSP and Rock Physics Constraints in Tomographic Anisotropy Estimation using Uncertainty Analysis – Konstantin Osypov*, Dave Nichols, Marta Woodward, Scott Leaney, Igor Borodin, Ran Bachrach, and Olga Zdraveva, Schlumberger
• Coffee Break: 2:55 ­­pm
• 3:05 ­­pm:  Scanning Anisotropy Parameters in General Inhomogeneous Media – Tariq Alkhalifah, KAUST Saudi Arabia
• 3:20 ­­pm:  TTI from Walkaway VSP: Constraint for PSDM Model Building? – Scott Leaney* and Steve Horne, Schlumberger; Brian Hornby, BP
• 3:35 ­­pm:  Parameter Estimation in TI Media by Joint Tomographic Inversion – Jacopo Panizzardi*, Nicola Bienati, and Clara Andreoletti, Eni E&P;  Lorenzo Casasanta, Politecnico di Milano
• 3:50 ­­pm:  Effect of Fluid Saturation on Elastic Anisotropy of Porous Rocks – Boris Gurevich, Curtin U of Technology
• 4:05 ­­pm:  Anisotropy Parameters in Shales: the Rock Physics Basis – Colin Sayers, Schlumberger
• 4:20 ­­pm:  Panel Discussion

Increasing global competition amongst oil and gas companies (both national and multi-national companies) for the earth’s hydrocarbon resources has heightened the importance attached by lease and concession operators to asset optimization – the maximization of recoverable resources in as technically effective, cost efficient, timely, environmentally sound, and safe manner as possible.  Consequently, oil-field operators today are embracing new geophysical technologies in pursuit of their asset-optimization goals.  The aim of this workshop is to examine state-of-the-art and next-generation developments in gravity and magnetic technologies as applied to oil and gas field drilling, development, and production. 

Technical content of the workshop’s talks and will span the total oil and gas field development “life cycle”.  Methodologies for identifying key fault and fracture zones prior to drilling will be discussed (e.g., high-resolution magnetic surveying and analysis), followed by examples of how to mitigate geohazard risks in the placement of drilling, development, and production oil-field infrastructure (e.g., site surveying using gravity gradiometry).  Advances in directional drilling using magnetic in-field referencing techniques will be discussed (including the development of new geomagnetic field models).  Evaluation of drilled intervals using current and next generation wireline logging tools (such as borehole gravimetry) will be discussed, as will tools and methodologies for monitoring reservoirs for life-of-field time scales (e.g., CO2 and steamflood surveillance via surface and borehole gravimetry measurements).

Compute intensive imaging paradigms make High Performance Computing (HPC) more vital than ever to the Oil and Gas Industry mission. In addition to imaging, HPC is critical for everything from timely modeling and simulation of large-scale physical systems, to processing, analysis and interpretation and visualization of huge seismic data volumes. Some applications, such as waveform inversion and true wave equation MVA were previously thought to be computationally impossible or impractical but are now making inroads into routine commercial application. This workshop will focus on implementations of these geophysical applications, presented by practitioners at the cutting edge of the field. Topics will include recent advances in HPC, as well as challenges due to the end of Moore's Law and its impact on the Oil and Gas Industry, and tools such as parallel visual analytics and routines that can be coupled with data analysis and simulations run on new HPC architectures or so-called integrated data analysis, visualization, simulation, computing environments that provide an end-to-end solution for analysis and visualization of scientific data and simulation results.

• The evolution of modern high channel count acquisition systems
• The value gained from high channel count integration
• The use of real time processing to guide high channel count acquisition
• Seismic acquisition design driven by interpretational needs, in particular non – conventional reservoirs
• Case studies of successful high channel count surveys
• Acquisition frontiers with examples from harsh noise environments
• The economic implications and limitations of ultra high effort 3D seismic
• Are we acquiring more data than we can effectively deal with?

• 1:30 pm:  Welcome and Introduction
• 1:40 pm: Physical properties measurements in the field: a geological survey perspective – Desmond Rainsford* and Tom Muir, Ontario Geological Survey 
• 2:15 pm:  Measuring physical properties in boreholes: successes and challenges – Vince Gerrie, DGI Geoscience
• 2:40 pm: Measuring physical properties in the laboratory: successes and challenges – Don Emerson (presented by Richard Smith)
• 3:05 pm:  Physical properties measurements for mineral exploration geophysics – Mark Shore*, Magma Geosciences Inc
• 3:30 pm:  Anisotropy of fractured mica-rich schist from Outokumpu, Finland: VSP measurements, laboratory measurements and theoretical model – Heather Schijns* and Douglas R. Schmitt, University of Alberta; Pekka Heikkinen, University of  Helsinki; Ilmo T. Kukkonen, Geological Survey of Finland
• 3:55 pm: Integrating petrophysical data to build a 3D-earth model – Emmanuel L. Bongajum*, Jun-wei Huang, and Bernd Milkereit, University of Toronto
• 4:20 pm:  Discussion session addressing the following questions:
  • What are the limitations of the instruments and how can the instruments be improved?
  • Are there other physical properties that should be measured?
  • Are the current measurements relevant (at the right scale or frequency range?)
  • Are the benefits obvious and do they justify the expense?  “...additional costs do not provide sufficient benefits...” (Cochrane et al., 1998).
  • Are there ways to display the data so that the data is easily understood?
  • Are there tools to compile the data and integrate it with geological or other geophysical information?
  • Do people have time to look at the data?
  • Do people know what to look for?
  • What is the variability of the data -- how does alteration and weathering affect the values?
  • What is the best way of looking at statistical variation?
  • How is statistical variation incorporated into modeling programs?

• Exploration drilling hazards including high pore pressures and associated features such as mud volcanoes, etc.
• Shallow hazards including shallow water flow sands, shallow gas, hydrates, weak formations, etc.
• Other natural hazards including seabed collapse, slope stability and turbidity flows.

• 1:30 pm:  Welcome and Introduction
• 1:35 pm: Hazards detection and quantification using long offset seismic data – Nader Dutta 
• 2:00 pm:  Pressure Prediction from Seismic - A drillers perspective – Chris Ward
• 2:25 pm: Pressure Prediction from 3D Seismic for an Offshore Location in the Gulf of Mexico – Jose Alvarellos
• 2:50 pm:  Recent Advances in Pore Pressure Prediction in Complex Geologic Environment – Alan R. Huffman
• 3:15 pm:  Understanding subsurface pressure helps to reduce the drilling hazards: Mud Volcanoes and numerical simulation – Huyen Bui
• 3:40 pm: Normal Compaction Trend Model that Fits Pore Pressure Prediction – Lev Vernik
• 4:05 pm: Mitigating Drilling Hazards in the Forties Field using Ocean Bottom Seismometers – Klaas Koster
• 4:30 pm: Panel discussion

National Oil Companies (NOCs) accounted for 52% of global oil production and controlled 88% of proven reserves in 2007 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_oil_company). In the past 20 years, technologically driven NOCs have devoted increasing effort and budget in their R&D program (e.g., Statoil, Petrobras and Aramco), resulting in innovations that lead to technical successes in operations. The objective of this workshop is to have senior technology leaders representing key NOCs present some of their recent technical successes, and where they are heading in terms of technical challenges. These would stimulate discussions on NOCs cooperation with IOCs (International Oil Companies), Independents, Contractors, University/R&D Labs, as well as addressing local content and environmental issues.

• 1:00 pm:  Introduction to Reserves reporting system, classification and determination – Rawdon Seager
• 2:00 pm:  Highlights of the new SEC rules and opportunities for geophysics – Rawdon Seager
• 2:30 pm:  Investment community viewpoint on the new SEC rules – Michael Hall
• 2:55 pm:  Break
• 3:05 pm:  What are geophysical reliable technologies, and their application conditions?  Leading presentation from organizing committee and discussion by all participants
• 3:50 pm:  Integrated workflows with geophysics being key components or how to integrate geophysics with other disciplines in reserves/resources booking and reporting – Robert Withers
• 4:35 pm:  Concluding discussion, e.g. necessity and feasibility of establishing SEG recognized technologies and workflows for reserves/resource booking and reporting

S-wave properties are essential for numerous applications, e.g. lithology/fluid discrimination, stress/fracture characterization and over pressure prediction. While the majority of our S-wave information comes from elastic inversion of P-wave data, routine deployment of horizontal motion sensors and acquisition of multicomponent data is on the rise. Part of this is driven by a growing number of acquisition programs that are specifically designed to recover converted-wave images that better constrain reservoir properties under certain well-documented situations. Another driver is the growing recognition in the industry of the potential for emerging full (acoustic + elastic) wave-field imaging techniques to deliver better subsurface predictions in complex geologic settings; chief among these techniques are full wave-field inversion (FWI) and elastic reverse time migration (ERTM). Success in this last area could mean that multicomponent seismic programs will soon transition from a niche technology to routine practice in the industry.

The primary objective of this workshop is to assess the current state of elastic wave-field inversion to obtain S-wave properties for interpretation, and to present recent case histories. It is intended to be a comprehensive treatment that includes all forms of inversion: P-wave AVO/A (azimuth), joint PP- and PS-wave AVO/A (or with pure-mode SS-wave data), and FWI. An important aspect of this workshop is to raise the awareness of the role in which S-waves contribute to interpretation. Are S-wave properties best obtained from P-wave data alone, or can multicomponent help reduce uncertainties, improve resolution and be combined with P-waves in practical ways?

• Prestack waveform inversion - The present and the road ahead – Subhashis Mallick, University of Wyoming
• Elastic inversion of surface waves – Anatoly Baumstein*, Warren S. Ross, and Sunwoong Lee, ExxonMobil Upstream Research Company
• The role of surface waves in shallow elastic imaging – Soumya Roy* and Robert Stewart, University of Houston
• Inversion for azimuthally varying shear-wave attenuation using mode-converted data – Bharath Shekar* and Ilya Tsvankin, Center for Wave Phenomena, Colorado School of Mines
• Break
• Joint PP-PS angle-stack analysis and AVA inversion in Grane field, offshore Norway – Tim Jenkinson*,Rishi Bansal, Vijay Khare, Mike Matheney, and Alex Martinez, ExxonMobil Upstream Research
  Company; Vincent Cornaglia, Esso Norge, A. S.
• Joint AVO inversion for time-lapse elastic reservoir properties: Hangingstone heavy oilfield, Alberta – Ayato Kato* and Robert Stewart, Uof Houston
• 3D PP-PS joint stratigraphic elastic inversion through combined AVA attributes – Edward-Benedict Brodie of Brodie*, Robert Garotta, and Pierre-Yves Granger, CGGVeritas
• Elastic prestack waveform inversion: case studies – Anthony Vassiliou*, GeoEnergy, Inc.; August Lau, Chuan Yin, and Mike Greenspon, Apache Corp.; Mark Hilliard, ConocoPhillips

• Joint inversion of different geophysical data types
• Joint inversion of geophysical and non-geophysical (production/hydrological) data
• Advances in linking different physical properties
• Case histories highlighting the value gained by joint inversion approach
• Theoretical and computational advances in joint inversion approaches such as data assimilation

• 8:30 am:  Joint inversion of seismic and fluid production data – Mrinal K. Sen, Paul L. Stoffa, Long Jin, Armando Sena and Roustan Seif, University of Texas at Austin
• 9:00 am:  Sampling-based Bayesian approaches for inversion – Jinsong Chen, Berkeley Lab
• 9:30 am:  Mathematical methods for joint inversion – from medical physics to geophysics – Eldad Haber, University of British Columbia
• 10:00 am:  Break
• 10:30 am:  Fracture diagnostics and reservoir monitoring using microseismicity and deformation-based measurements – Jing Du, Norm Warpinski and Kevin Fisher, Pinnacle – A Halliburton Service
• 11:00 am:  Building a 3D mechanical earth model using seismic inversion, rock physics, and geomechanics – Mita Sengupta and Jorg Herwanger, WesternGeco/Schlumberger
• 11:30 am:  Streamline-based integration of time-lapse seismic and production data into high resolution geologic models –  Alvaro Rey and Akhil Datta-Gupta, Texas A&M University
• 12:00 pm:  Lunch Break
• 1:00 pm:  Poster sessions
  • Time-lapse cross-equalization of time-lapse seismic data sets by linearized joint inversion – Gboyega Ayeni and Biondo Biondi, Stanford University
  • Application of particle swarm optimization for joint inversion of seismic and production data – Amit Suman and Tapan Mukherji, Stanford University
• 1:30 pm:  Computational approaches to integrating seismic and reservoir engineering data – two case studies – Detlef Hohl, Shell
• 2:00 pm:  The use of different coupling strategies in joint inversion – M. Jegen, M. Moorkamp, and B. Heincke, IFM-GEOMAR;  R. Hobbs and A. Richards, University of Durham
• 2:30 pm:  Joint electromagnetic, seismic and pressure data inversion algorithms for reservoir exploration and monitoring – Aria Abubakar, Tarek M. Habashy, Lin  Liang, Guozhong Gao and Jianguo Liu, Schlumberger-Doll Research, Cambridge, MA
• 3:00 pm:  Joint seismic and electrical properties of sandstones and their implications on their pore structure – Arthur Cheng, OHM Rock Solid Images; Tongcheng Han and Angus Best, National Oceanography Center, Southampton and University of Southampton
• 3:30 pm:  Discussions

• Uncertainty and risk associated with CO2 EOR and sequestration
• Rock physics, fluid saturation, geochemistry, and geomechanical properties – Integration of data, scaling issues, and simulation studies
• Engineering aspects of injecting megatons of CO2 in heterogeneous reservoirs
• Potential geophysical, geomechanical, and engineering technologies or tools for imaging and assessing dynamic changes in fractured or faulted reservoirs and seals.
• Technology gaps and promising engineering/geophysical technologies for quantitative reservoir management, monitoring, leakage detection, and mitigation.
• Pushing the limit on data acquisition, imaging, and reservoir management in areas of dense population/infrastructure.
• Underexplored EOR and CO2 sequestration issues onshore and offshore North America, China, Taiwan, Japan, and Australia.

• Rock/fluid changes associated with CO2 injection
• Operational  matters (infrastructure and procedure) associated with CO2 -especially for EOR
• Regulatory requirements and technical Issues related to the economics and feasibility of large scale injections (e.g. 1 % containment issue, EOR vs sequestration)

• seismic velocity model building including anisotropy, errors and location inaccuracies
• source mechanisms
• constraints on reservoir modeling/simulation from microseismic events

• 8:00 am:  Resource Shale Characterization, chair Colin Sayers
  • KEYNOTE : Murray Roth – Overview of shale resource plays
  • Bob Tatham – review of Austin AAPG/SPE/SEG shales workshop
  • Colin Sayers – Seismic anisotropy and heterogeneity related to production
• 9:00 am:  Discussion Session I - Discussion Leader Bob Tatham
• 9:30 am:  Coffee Break 
• 10:00 am:  Shale Geomechanics and Geophysics, chair Bob Tatham
  • Tom Davis - Looking for gas in all the tight places
  • Azra Tutuncu – Geomechanics in clay-rich rocks
  • Russ Ewy&Luca Duranti – Shale Geomechanics, and Connections to Rock Physics
  • Dan Moos –  Stimulation modeling in Fractured Shales
• 11:00 am:  Discussion Session II – Discussion Leader Colin Sayers
• 11:30 pm: Lunch Break 
• 12:30 pm:  Shale Measurements and Rock Physics, chair Ali Mese
  • Dave Dewhurst – Shale anisotropy measurements from CSIRO
  • Amos Nur – computational rock physics for resource shales
  • Nazmul Haq Mondol - Porosity-depth trends for mudstones and shales
  • Chandra Rai – Lab measurements for resource shales
• 1:30 pm:  Discussion Session III – Discussion Leader Stephan Gelinsky
• 2:00 pm: Coffee Break
• 2:30 pm:  Seals and Overpressure, chair Stephan Gelinsky
  • Keith Katahara  – Issues in using poroelastic models for fracture pressure in shales
  • James Krushin – Thermodynamics-based shale compaction trends
  • Stephanie Nowak – Pore pressure from seismic impedance
  • Kirk Hansen – Pore Pressure Prediction for Bossier and Haynesville
• 3:30 pm:  Discussion Session IV – Discussion Leader Dan Ebrom

• WAZ noise attenuation
• WAZ multiple attenuation (multidimensional deconvolution, 3D radon, 3D SRME…)
• Multidimensional interpolation
• WAZ imaging (multi/full azimuth image gathers, common offset vector  techniques)
• Azimuthal velocity analysis, and azimuthal velocity correction
• Azimuthal amplitude analysis for fracture detection