Search results

At present numerical simulation of seismicity, used in mining and hydraulic fracturing practice, is quite time expensive what hampers its combined employing with observed seismicity in real time. The purpose of this paper is to suggest a mean for drastic speeding up numerical modeling seismic and aseismic events.

The authors propose the means to radically decrease the time expense for the bottleneck stage of simulation: calculations of stresses, induced by a large group of already activated flaws (sources of events), at locations of flaws of another large group, which may be activated by the stresses. This is achieved by building a hierarchical tree and properly accounting for the sizes of activated flaws, excluding check of their influence on flaws, which are beyond strictly defined near-regions of strong interaction.

Comparative simulations of seismicity by conventional and improved methods demonstrate high efficiency of the means developed. When applied to practical mining and hydrofracturing problems, it requires some two orders less time to obtain practically the same output results as those of conventional methods.

The proposed improvement provides a means for simulation of seismicity in real time of mining steps and hydrofracture propagation. It can be also used in other applications involving seismic and aseismic events and acoustic emission.

This paper aims to identify the factors that are constraining technological innovation to support the development of coalbed methane in China.

The analysis applies ideas relating to national and sector systems of innovation to explain why China’s strategies to support research and technological innovation have failed to stimulate the desired progress in coalbed methane production. It also provides a counter-example of the USA that implemented a number of measures in the 1970s that proved very effective.

The deficiencies of China’s research and development strategies in support of coalbed methane development reflect the national and sectoral systems of innovation. They are exacerbated by the structure of the national oil and gas industry. Key constraints include the excessively top-down management of the national R&D agenda, insufficient support for basic research, limited collaboration networks between companies, research institutes and universities and weak mechanisms for diffusion of knowledge. The success of the USA was based on entirely different systems for innovation and in quite a different industrial setting.

The originality of this analysis lies in placing the challenges facing research and innovation for China’s coalbed methane development in the context of the national and sectoral systems for innovation and comparing with the approach and success of the USA.