CO Injection For Geological Storage

2010 SPE International CO2 Conference
Carbon Sequestration: Storage of CO2 in Geologic Formations
CO2 Injection For Geological Storage
Dr. Steven L. Bryant
Associate Professor
Dept. of Petroleum and Geosystems Engineering
Director
Geologic CO2 Storage Joint Industry Project
The University of Texas at Austin
Module Objectives
ƒ INTRODUCTION TO CO2 SEQUESTRATION IN
WATER-BEARING FORMATIONS
ƒ Know the scale at which sequestration will have to
operate
ƒ Know key physical properties of CO2
ƒ Know several important physical, chemical phenomena
in geologic storage
ƒ Be able to estimate volume of structure needed for CO2
storage
ƒ Be able to estimate safe rates of injection
ƒ Demonstrate principle of safe structural storage
STORE (Sequestration Training, Outreach, Research and Education)
B-1
2010 SPE International CO2 Conference
Carbon Sequestration: Storage of CO2 in Geologic Formations
Scale of CO2 sequestration is set by scale of
fossil fuel consumption
Approximate CO2 emitted by
burning fossil fuel
2
ton CO2/ton coal
3
ton CO2/ton oil
2.75
ton CO2/ton natural gas
1 ton = one metric ton = 1000 kg
1 Mt = one megaton = 106 ton
1 Gt = one gigaton = 1000 Mt = 109 ton
1 Pg = one petagram = 1015 g = 1 Gt
CO2 emissions from human activities
CO2 emissions (PgC y-1)
10
3.7 ton CO2 = 1 ton C
8
Fossil fuel
6
4
Land use change
2
1960
1970
1980
STORE (Sequestration Training, Outreach, Research and Education)
1990
2000
2010
B-2
2010 SPE International CO2 Conference
Carbon Sequestration: Storage of CO2 in Geologic Formations
CO2 emissions from fossil fuel consumption
Global emissions from fossil fuel consumption
35
30
Gt CO2 per year
25
20
Flaring
Cement
Gas
Liquids
Solids
15
10
5
0
1850
1900
1950
2000
CO2 emissions from human activities
By source (in 2000, as CO2)
ƒ Solid fuel
ƒ Liquid fuel
ƒ Gaseous fuel
ƒ Subtotal: fossil fuel
emissions
ƒ As carbon
ƒ Flaring + cement
ƒ Land use change
ƒ Total
ƒ As carbon
STORE (Sequestration Training, Outreach, Research and Education)
8.6 Gt
10.4 Gt
4.7 Gt
23.7 Gt
¾ of total
6.3 Gt
1.0 Gt
7.6 Gt
32 Gt
8.6 Gt
B-3
2010 SPE International CO2 Conference
Carbon Sequestration: Storage of CO2 in Geologic Formations
Global CO2 emissions by sector
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
(2004 data)
Electricity generation, heat 41%
Transportation
20%
Industry
18%
Residential/Commercial
13%
Other
8%
CO2 emissions by sector
ƒ Electricity generation: ~10 GT CO2/y
ƒ About a third of anthropogenic emissions
STORE (Sequestration Training, Outreach, Research and Education)
B-4
2010 SPE International CO2 Conference
Carbon Sequestration: Storage of CO2 in Geologic Formations
Exercise 1: CO2 emissions at the global scale
ƒ
In 2009 what was rate of CO2 emissions from coal, oil and
natural gas consumption in
ƒ China
ƒ USA
ƒ
Compare CO2 emission rates from China and from USA
ƒ per capita
ƒ per $ GDP
Population, 2009 (CIA World
3.07E+08
China
1.34E+09
US
Approximate oil equivalents
2 ton coal = 1 ton oil equivalent
GDP, 2009, purchasing powe
1.41E+13
China
8.75E+12
US
Gas conversion
1 Mt gas = 48 BCF
CO2 emissions from electricity generation
ƒ 19900 TWhr generated in 2007
ƒ 72 EJ
ƒ 4000 GW generating capacity
ƒ 10 GT CO2/y
ƒ About a third of anthropogenic
emissions
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
1
1
1
1
1
GW
GW
GW
GW
GW
coal-fired Æ ~7.6 MT CO2/y
gas-fired Æ ~3.9 MT CO2/y
hydroelectric Æ ~0 MT CO2/y
nuclear Æ ~0 MT CO2/y
oil-fired Æ ~7.5 MT CO2/y
STORE (Sequestration Training, Outreach, Research and Education)
http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf
/ieo/electricity.html
B-5
2010 SPE International CO2 Conference
Carbon Sequestration: Storage of CO2 in Geologic Formations
Conversion factors for CO2
0.379
MSCF per lbmol
0.00861
MSCF per lb
18.95
MSCF/ton
18.95
MMSCF/thousand ton
18.95
BSCF/million ton
18.95
TSCF/gigaton
1 ton = 1000 kg
3.7 ton CO2 = 1 ton C
Geologic CO2 Sequestration: target formations
CO
CO22
Oil/Gas Producing Reservoir
Aquifer/Depleted
Oil or Gas Reservoir
1 mile
Unmineable Coal
Deep Saline Aquifer
STORE (Sequestration Training, Outreach, Research and Education)
B-6
2010 SPE International CO2 Conference
Carbon Sequestration: Storage of CO2 in Geologic Formations
Geologic CO2 Sequestration: target formations
IPCC SRCCS Technical Summary
Where can we put that much CO2?
OIL & GAS RESERVOIRS
In NORTH AMERICA
140 GT CO2
STORE (Sequestration Training, Outreach, Research and Education)
B-7
2010 SPE International CO2 Conference
Carbon Sequestration: Storage of CO2 in Geologic Formations
Where can we put that much CO2?
UNMINEABLE COAL
SEAMS
In NORTH AMERICA
175 GT CO2
Where can we put that much CO2?
SALINE
9 DEEP
AQUIFERS
In NORTH AMERICA
>3000 GT CO2
STORE (Sequestration Training, Outreach, Research and Education)
B-8
2010 SPE International CO2 Conference
Carbon Sequestration: Storage of CO2 in Geologic Formations
CO2 density at conditions of shallow Earth’s crust (onshore)
Exercise 2a: CO2 emissions at the local scale
ƒ How much CO2 was produced from Fayette County
Power Project per year?
ƒ Suppose a pilot capture plant is retrofitted onto Fayette
to capture 10% of emissions.
ƒ Calculate required CO2 storage rate
ƒ Ton CO2/day
ƒ MMSCF CO2/day
ƒ Suppose the G-2 unit of the Wilcox formation is selected
for injecting the captured CO2
ƒ Calculate pore volume required to store 3 y of pilot plant
operation
STORE (Sequestration Training, Outreach, Research and Education)
B-9
2010 SPE International CO2 Conference
Carbon Sequestration: Storage of CO2 in Geologic Formations
Petrophysical properties relevant to aquifer storage
ƒ Porosity
ƒ Permeability
ƒ Multiphase flow properties
ƒ Relative permeability
ƒ Capillary pressure
ƒ Drainage/imbibition hysteresis
Petrophysical properties relevant to aquifer storage
ƒ Porosity
ƒ Fraction of bulk rock volume
containing fluid
ƒ Larger porosity means smaller
footprint for given CO2 volume
ƒ Smaller porosity could yield
greater long-term security of
storage
ƒ Correlated to residual CO2
saturation
STORE (Sequestration Training, Outreach, Research and Education)
B-10
2010 SPE International CO2 Conference
Carbon Sequestration: Storage of CO2 in Geologic Formations
Petrophysical properties relevant to aquifer storage
ƒ Porosity
ƒ Permeability
ƒ Multiphase flow properties
ƒ Relative permeability
ƒ Capillary pressure
ƒ Drainage/imbibition hysteresis
Storage volume in aquifers: relative permeability
(two-phase flow) is important
ƒ
Frontal saturation advance
ƒ Buckley-Leverett theory
ƒ Injected CO2 occupies only a fraction
of the invaded pore volume
STORE (Sequestration Training, Outreach, Research and Education)
CO2 + brine
brine
B-11
2010 SPE International CO2 Conference
Carbon Sequestration: Storage of CO2 in Geologic Formations
Exercise 2b: CO2 emissions at the local scale
ƒ After a successful pilot plant run, the Fayette Project is
retrofitted to capture 90% of emissions.
ƒ Use your results from Exercise 2a to calculate required CO2
storage rate
ƒ Ton CO2/day
ƒ m3 CO2/day at reservoir conditions
ƒ Calculate rock volume and areal extent required to store
30 y of captured emissions
ƒ Need Wilcox G2 thickness, porosity
ƒ Assume average saturation of CO2 is 0.5
Storage Efficiency: fraction of structure pore volume that
actually contains CO2
ƒ Combination of
ƒ Displacement efficiency
ƒ Areal sweep efficiency
ƒ Vertical sweep efficiency
ƒ Gravity override efficiency
ƒ Overall storage efficiency
STORE (Sequestration Training, Outreach, Research and Education)
B-12
2010 SPE International CO2 Conference
Carbon Sequestration: Storage of CO2 in Geologic Formations
Modes of storage in sedimentary rocks
Structural storage
Dissolution trapping
Residual phase trapping
Mineralization trapping
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ
permanent
Geologic CO2 Sequestration:
several simultaneous modes of storage in aquifers
Unmineable Coal
Oil/Gas Producing Reservoir
Aquifer/Depleted
Oil or Gas Reservoir
Bulk phase CO2
Deepdissolved
Saline Aquifer
Residual phase
ƒ
Structural trapping
ƒ
ƒ
Overlying formation blocks upward
flow
Dissolution trapping
ƒ
CO2 solubility in brine ~ 1 mol%
STORE (Sequestration Training, Outreach, Research and Education)
ƒ
Residual phase trapping
ƒ
Mineral trapping
ƒ
ƒ
1/3 to 2/3 of the void volume
CaCO3, MgCO3, FeCO3
B-13
2010 SPE International CO2 Conference
Carbon Sequestration: Storage of CO2 in Geologic Formations
Secure storage: capillary seal of overlying
formation is important
ƒ If Pentry of sealing
formation > PCO2 – PH2O
then CO2 remains in storage
formation
ƒ If Pentry of sealing
formation < PCO2 – PH2O
seal
seal
h
CO2 Storage
stratum
formation
then CO2 can leak from storage
formation
ƒ Pentry = 2 σ cosθ / rthroat
Other strata
Exercise 3: Capillary sealing capacity
1. Assume that CO2 is injected so that it fills the entire thickness of the G-2 unit.
Determine the capillary pressure PCO2 - PH2O at the top of the G-2 formation
You will need to recall the density of CO2 at storage formation conditions
from previous problems. Assume the density of the brine is 1000 kg/m3.
2. The low-permeability base of the Lower Wilcox G-1 unit should act as a
capillary seal for fluids in the Lower Wilcox G-2. Suppose that the pore
throats in the G-1 unit have radius 0.25 microns, and that the interfacial
tension between CO2 and the brine is 0.015 N/m. What is the capillary entry
pressure of the G-1 unit for CO2? Assume the CO2/brine/rock contact angle
is 45 degrees.
3. Will the G-1 provide secure structural storage if CO2 fills the G-2?
4. Experiment: Tubes packed with different sizes of beads are filled with a
hydrocarbon phase (top third) and water (bottom two thirds). Half the tube is
packed with one size of beads, the other half with a different size. When the
tubes are inverted (so that the part containing hydrocarbon phase is at the
bottom), buoyancy causes the hydrocarbon to rise and water to fall. Observe
the distance that hydrocarbon rises in each tube, and explain any differences
between the tubes.
STORE (Sequestration Training, Outreach, Research and Education)
B-14
2010 SPE International CO2 Conference
Carbon Sequestration: Storage of CO2 in Geologic Formations
Rate of Geologic CO2 Storage
Depends on Injectivity of Structure
TOP SEAL
q
q
q
h
STORAGE AQUIFER
Average permeability k
CONFINING LAYER
Injectivity for single phase flow
Injectivity for CO2 storage More complicated!
Petrophysical properties relevant to
storage rates
ƒ Permeability
ƒ Rock property that relates driving force
(pressure gradient) to flux (flow of single
phase fluid)
ƒ Darcy’s empirical law
ƒ Large permeability requires less pressure to
inject a given CO2 rate
ƒ Heterogeneous permeability can lead to CO2
plume moving unexpected directions or
distances
STORE (Sequestration Training, Outreach, Research and Education)
B-15
2010 SPE International CO2 Conference
Carbon Sequestration: Storage of CO2 in Geologic Formations
Petrophysical properties relevant to
storage rate
ƒ Multiphase flow properties
ƒ Relative permeability
ƒ Normalized hydraulic conductivity to one
phase (CO2 or brine) when both phases
are present in the rock
ƒ Typically expressed as function of phase
saturation
ƒ Phase saturation = Fraction of pore volume
occupied by that phase
Petrophysical properties relevant to
storage rates
ƒ
Multiphase flow properties
ƒ Relative permeability
Drainage: CO2
displaces brine
Sw,irr
STORE (Sequestration Training, Outreach, Research and Education)
B-16
2010 SPE International CO2 Conference
Carbon Sequestration: Storage of CO2 in Geologic Formations
Fluid properties relevant to storage rate: CO2
viscosity at conditions of shallow Earth’s crust
CO2 and brine viscosities as function of
depth of storage formation
Geothermal grad=16.5 F/1000ft
Viscosity (cp)
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
3000
109.5
4000
129.5
5000
Depth (ft)
149.5
6000
7000
8000
169.5
CO2
water
9000
10000
189.5
209.5
Temperature (degrees F)
0
229.5
11000
STORE (Sequestration Training, Outreach, Research and Education)
B-17
2010 SPE International CO2 Conference
Carbon Sequestration: Storage of CO2 in Geologic Formations
Storage rates: Injectivity index depends on
formation kh and CO2 properties
ƒ
ƒ
skin
factor
Assume radial flow from each injector
Assume for illustration that steadystate single phase flow equation
applies
ƒ relates injection pressure Pbh to
injection rate q and pressure in aquifer
P(r)
ƒ Actual rate smaller because of relative
permeability effects
injection well
radius
CO2 rate (reservoir condition)
Injectivity index (single phase flow)
Bottomhole
injection
pressure
Average
formation
pressure
brine
viscosity
storage
aquifer
radius
Storage rates: adjust injectivity index for
multiphase flow effects (CO2 displacing brine)
two-phase
dry CO2
CO2 - saturated
brine
Rough estimate
brine
Watersaturated CO2
Injectivity index (two phase flow)
STORE (Sequestration Training, Outreach, Research and Education)
B-18
2010 SPE International CO2 Conference
Carbon Sequestration: Storage of CO2 in Geologic Formations
Exercise 4a: Storage rates
ƒ Estimate the CO2 injectivity of the Wilcox G-2
formation
ƒ Need permeability, viscosity of brine
ƒ Assume aquifer drainage radius 10 km
ƒ Assume wellbore radius 0.1 m, skin S = 0
ƒ Consider a pilot project that will capture 10%
of the CO2 emissions from the Fayette Co.
Power Project.
ƒ Estimate the pressure difference required to
inject the captured CO2 during the pilot project
Storage rates: fracture pressure limits
injection rate into a well
ƒ
Injection pressure Pbh should not exceed
formation parting pressure Pfrac
ƒ
Formation parting pressure typically a
function of aquifer depth z
If Pbh is limited, and if average formation
pressure increases during injection, then rate
of injection must decrease during storage
ƒ Operating constraint for CO2 injectors
ƒ
constant
STORE (Sequestration Training, Outreach, Research and Education)
B-19
2010 SPE International CO2 Conference
Carbon Sequestration: Storage of CO2 in Geologic Formations
Example: compute safe injection rate into the
Wilcox G-2
effective injectivity index
9.3243E-12 m^3/Pa/s
hydrostatic gradient
10
assume frac gradient
16
depth to Wilcox, Fayette Co
2164
frac pressure in Wilcox, Fayette Co
34.6
initial pressure in Wilcox
21.64
initial allowable DP
13.0
initial injection rate
0.00012107
6.8
MPa/km
MPa/km
m
MPa
MPa
MPa
m^3/s
ton/d
Storage rates: multiple injection wells offer
obvious advantage over single injection well
ƒ Good news: multiple injectors enable greater
overall injection rate than single well
ƒ Bad news: multiple injectors interfere with
each other
1 well
2 well
STORE (Sequestration Training, Outreach, Research and Education)
4 well
B-20
2010 SPE International CO2 Conference
Carbon Sequestration: Storage of CO2 in Geologic Formations
Storage rates: interference between multiple
injection wells reduces injection rate per well
ƒ Can approximate interference
effect with “equivalent skin”*
R
ƒ Single “equivalent well”
ƒ Seq depends on
ƒ Number of injectors n
ƒ Distance of each injector from center
of storage formation R
ƒ Skin factor of each injector S
ƒ Radius of each injector rw
equivalent
injector
*Pooladi-Darvish et al., GHGT10 Energy Procedia, 2010
Storage rates: multiple injection wells increase overall
rate, but not proportionately to well number
ƒ Interference causes benefit of drilling additional wells to
diminish as number of wells increases
Benefit of multiple injection wells
Benefit of multiple injection wells
10
injectivity index of equivalent well,
relative to single injector
injectivity index of equivalent well,
relative to single injector
10
9
8
7
re = 30 km
6
rw = 0.1 m
5
R = 5 km
4
S=0
3
2
9
8
7
6
5
re = 15 km
4
rw = 0.1 m
3
R = 1 km
2
S=2
1
1
0
10
20
30
40
number of injection wells
STORE (Sequestration Training, Outreach, Research and Education)
0
10
20
30
40
number of injection wells
B-21
2010 SPE International CO2 Conference
Carbon Sequestration: Storage of CO2 in Geologic Formations
Exercise 4b: Storage rates
ƒ Consider a pilot project that will capture 10% of the CO2
emissions from the Fayette Co. Power Project.
ƒ Consider strategies for storing the captured CO2 in the
Wilcox G2
ƒ How many wells do you need?
ƒ How far from center of the formation do you put them?
ƒ What skin factor would you like them to have?
ƒ Suppose you are limited to 10 injection wells
ƒ What formation properties do you require?
ƒ Permeability, thickness
ƒ Suppose you are limited to 3 injection wells
ƒ What formation properties do you require?
Exercise 4b solution:
can Wilcox G-2 work?
500 wells 18.5 km from center of
0.5 mD, 23 m thick Wilcox G-2
Use multiple injection wells in the Wilcox G2
permeability
thickness
brine viscosity at 2 km
effective mobility
drainage radius r_e
wellbore radius r_w
number of wells, n
distance of each well to center, R
skin of each injectino well, S
equivalent skin for single injector
skin to use (allows compare n=1)
effective injectivity index
emssions rate
mass rate of CO2 for pilot (10% cap
q_CO2_reservoir_conditions_pilot
Pressure Difference needed to injec
Limit on DP by fracture criterion
STORE (Sequestration Training, Outreach, Research and Education)
0.5
5E-16
23
0.36
0.00036
1389
40000.0
0.1
500
18500
-2.000
-12.13
-12.127184
4.5542E-09
mD
m^2
m
cP
Pa-s
(Pa-s)^(-1)
m
m
m^3/Pa/s
12.5
3425
3424658
5269
0.061
13390007
13.4
13
Mt CO2/y
t CO2/d
kg CO2/d
m^3/d
m^3/s
Pa
MPa
MPa
m
Not a good
use of space!
B-22
2010 SPE International CO2 Conference
Carbon Sequestration: Storage of CO2 in Geologic Formations
Exercise 4b solution: Seek other storage
formations with manageable well count
10 wells 1000 m from center of
50 mD, 23 m thick formation
Use multiple injection wells in the Wilcox G2
Use multiple injection wells in the Wilcox G2
permeability
50
5E-14
23
0.36
0.00036
1389
10000.0
0.1
10
1000
0.000
-8.48
-8.476938
4.3901E-09
thickness
brine viscosity at 2 km
effective mobility
drainage radius r_e
wellbore radius r_w
number of wells, n
distance of each well to center, R
skin of each injectino well, S
equivalent skin for single injector
skin to use (allows compare n=1)
effective injectivity index
emssions rate
mass rate of CO2 for pilot (10% cap
q_CO2_reservoir_conditions_pilot
Pressure Difference needed to injec
Limit on DP by fracture criterion
12.5
3425
3424658
5269
0.061
13890526
13.9
13
3 wells 750 m from center of
20 mD, 120 m thick formation
mD
m^2
m
cP
Pa-s
(Pa-s)^(-1)
m
m
m
m^3/Pa/s
Mt CO2/y
t CO2/d
kg CO2/d
m^3/d
m^3/s
Pa
MPa
MPa
permeability
thickness
brine viscosity at 2 km
effective mobility
drainage radius r_e
wellbore radius r_w
number of wells, n
distance of each well to center, R
skin of each injectino well, S
equivalent skin for single injector
skin to use (allows compare n=1)
effective injectivity index
emssions rate
mass rate of CO2 for pilot (10% cap
q_CO2_reservoir_conditions_pilot
Pressure Difference needed to injec
Limit on DP by fracture criterion
20
2E-14
120
0.36
0.00036
1389
10000.0
0.1
3
750
0.000
-6.33
-6.3260968
4.7205E-09
12.5
3425
3424658
5269
0.061
12918262
12.9
13
mD
m^2
m
cP
Pa-s
(Pa-s)^(-1)
m
m
m
m^3/Pa/s
Mt CO2/y
t CO2/d
kg CO2/d
m^3/d
m^3/s
Pa
MPa
MPa
Module 2: Key Lessons
ƒ Volumes and rates for substantive CCS are huge
ƒ Deep saline aquifers needed
ƒ CO2 is less dense than brine under typical geologic
storage conditions
ƒ Driving force for leakage
ƒ Petrophysical properties – especially multiphase
rock/fluid properties – strongly influence injection, longterm security of storage
ƒ Need to characterize formation before project
STORE (Sequestration Training, Outreach, Research and Education)
B-23