Carbon Capture & Storage
Purpose-built CCS monitoring with automated regulatory compliance — EPA Class VI, EU CCS Directive, and IPCC reporting.
10
science modules
3
regulatory frameworks
P10/P50/P90
uncertainty quantification
< 3%
deviation from Sleipner benchmark
Purpose-built for CCS — not adapted E&P tools
Generic seismic interpretation tools were designed for hydrocarbon exploration. CCS requires a different set of physics models, regulatory frameworks, and evidence standards.
Regulatory Automation
Auto-generated EPA Class VI Annual Report, EU MRV compliance package, and IPCC 2006 evidence bundles. SHA-256 provenance on every submitted document. One analysis, three reports.
Science Rigor
10 peer-reviewed science modules — every method backed by published literature with DOI-traceable citations. Validated against Sleipner 1994–2020 time-lapse seismic vintages.
Multi-Jurisdiction
EPA Class VI (US), EU CCS Directive 2009/31/EC, and IPCC 2006 Guidelines covered out of the box. One evidence pipeline feeds all three regulatory frameworks simultaneously.
Audit Trail
Ed25519-signed SHA-256 hash-chained audit records for every subsurface analysis, review decision, and export. Dual-control approval gate on all regulatory sign-offs.
Three frameworks, one evidence pipeline
The same subsurface analysis feeds all three reporting requirements simultaneously. Evidence packages are auto-assembled with SHA-256 provenance and dual-control sign-off.
| Requirement | EPA Class VI | EU CCS | IPCC 2006 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Area of Review / Dynamic Modelling | — | ||
| Annual injection & monitoring reports | — | ||
| Mass balance / storage permanence | |||
| Uncertainty quantification (P10/P50/P90) | — | ||
| Plume extent & leakage fraction |
From Upload to Compliance Report
Five automated stages take raw seismic and injection data to a signed, auditable compliance package — in under a day.
Upload
SEG-Y / LAS / injection data
Denoise
3D U-Net noise attenuation
CCS Analysis
10 science modules in parallel
Review
HITL + dual-control approval
Report
EPA / EU / IPCC auto-generated
Numbers that matter to regulators
10 science modules
From injection through closure — plume, pressure, mass balance, risk, trapping, saturation, gravity, migration, geomechanics, regulatory reporting.
3 regulatory frameworks
EPA Class VI, EU CCS Directive 2009/31/EC, IPCC 2006 Guidelines. Same evidence, auto-formatted for each jurisdiction.
P10/P50/P90 uncertainty
Monte Carlo uncertainty quantification on mass balance, pressure, and migration rate. Regulators require uncertainty bounds — Seismic Swift AI provides them automatically.
< 3% deviation from Sleipner benchmark
CO₂ plume extent matches Equinor's published Sleipner interpretation within 3%. Mass balance closure at 85% — meeting the IEA GHG 2009 conformance threshold.
Sleipner CO₂ Storage Validation
The world's first offshore CCS project. Seismic Swift AI validated against published 4D seismic vintages and peer-reviewed mass balance estimates from the CO₂ Storage project consortium.
- CO₂ plume extent within 8% of Equinor published data
- 4D NRMS repeatability consistent with R-factor baselines
- 85% mass balance closure (IEA GHG 2009 threshold)
- Migration rate within EPA Class VI centroid bounds
- Benchmarked against Snøhvit and Quest reference datasets
Ready to automate your CCS compliance workflow?
14-day free trial. EPA Class VI, EU CCS Directive, and IPCC 2006 coverage included.