How Equivalent Are Equivalent Porous Media?

Geoenergy and geoengineering applications usually involve fluid injection into and production from fractured media. Accounting for fractures is important because of the strong poromechanical coupling that ties pore pressure changes and deformation. A possible approach to the problem uses equivalent porous media to reduce the computational cost and model complexity instead of explicitly including fractures in the models. We investigate the validity of this simplification by comparing these two approaches. Simulation results show that pore pressure distribution significantly differs between the two approaches even when both are calibrated to predict identical values at the injection and production wells. Additionally, changes in fracture stability are not well captured with the equivalent porous medium. We conclude that explicitly accounting for fractures in numerical models may be necessary under some circumstances to perform reliable coupled thermohydromechanical simulations, which could be used in conjunction with other tools for induced seismicity forecasting.
A.Z. acknowledges the financial support received from the “Iran's Ministry of Science, Research and Technology” (PhD students' sabbatical grants) for visiting IDAEA‐CSIC. The contribution of F.P. is funded by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG, German Research Foundation)—project number PA 3451/1‐1. R.M. is thankful for the support from US DOE through Carbon SAFE Macon County Project DE‐FE0029381. V.V. acknowledges funding from the Spanish National Research Council (CSIC) through the Intramural project 201730I100 and from the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union's Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Program through the Starting Grant GEoREST (www.georest.eu) (Grant agreement No. 801809). IDAEA‐CSIC is a Center of Excellence Severo Ochoa (Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation, Project CEX2018‐000794‐S). The authors declare no conflict of interest.