Search

Abstract: Chemical tracers have been used in various C capture and storage (CCS) projects worldwide primarily to provide information regarding subsurface migration of CO2 and to verify CO2 containment. Understanding the movement and interactions of CO2 in the subsurface is a challenging task considering the variety of states in which it exists (i.e. gas, liquid, supercritical, dissolved in water) and the range of possible storage mechanisms (i.e. residual or capillary trapping, dissolved in water, structural trapping or incorporation into minerals). This paper critically reviews several chemical tracer applications and case studies for CCS projects. In many instances, there are parallels (e.g. tracer classes and applications) between tracers in the oil and gas industry and in CCS. It has been shown that chemical tracers can complement geophysical measurements (e.g. seismic) in understanding the formation behaviour of CO2. Although tracers have been successfully used in many CCS projects, some fundamental information, for example partitioning and adsorption, about the behaviour of tracers is still lacking and this can be an issue when interpreting tracer data (e.g. determining leakage rates). In this paper the deployment and recovery of chemical tracers and their use on various CCS projects are described. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: When a large volume of CO2 is injected into a geological formation this can lead to the mobilisation of substances of a chemical and physical nature. The purpose of this IEA GHG study[1] was to identify typical substances that could be mobilised during geosequestration and to evaluate potential tools for monitoring these substances. This project reviewed the scientific literature patent applications and industry publications relevant to the current monitoring of chemical and physical processes due to CO2-formation water-rock interactions from the deep subsurface through to the soil/water interface. Four major areas were identified for review: 1– physical effects, including pressure effects or displacement of fluids; 2 – geochemical effects, including dissolution of reservoir and seal rocks, as well as the potential for mobilisation of heavy metals; 3 – shallow/surface effects, potential nutrients/toxic compounds affecting soils and microbial communities, as well as groundwater quality; 4 –capture contaminant effects from coal fired plants and other point source emitters. The various processes have different degrees of impact in the three general monitoring domains: a) injection horizon (depleted hydrocarbon reservoir, saline formation), b) above-zone interval (zone directly overlying the seal of the storage interval), and c) shallow subsurface (potable groundwater aquifers, soil). Understanding these processes and mapping their distribution aids in the identification of potential monitoring tools and facilitates an assessment of their utility in a particular monitoring domain. Some tools already commonly deployed in other industries are highly applicable to the carbon storage industry; for example, downhole pressure gauges from the oil industry and water level loggers from the groundwater industry. In general, geophysical tools were found to be quite a mature method for identifying the presence of gas (hydrocarbons or CO2), but less so for observing mobilised substances and changes in salinity. Tools for measuring trace amounts of hydrocarbons in marine settings are able to be modified in order to be used for monitoring mobilised hydrocarbons entrained in capture emissions, from CO2/source rock interactions or ienhanced oil recovery processes, though many of the tools are not compound specific as yet. The aim of the project is to provide an understanding of the availability of conventional and novel tools for monitoring and verification (M&V) during CO2 injection. Some of these tools have been successfully employed in current carbon capture and storage (CCS) projects or in alternative applications, such as mineral exploration and ecological studies. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: The Cooperative Research Centre for Greenhouse Gas Technologies (CO2CRC) Otway Project in Australia is the first heavily monitored pilot site for CO2 storage in a depleted natural gas reservoir. With the site characterisation and risk analysis complete, the new CRC-1 injection well was drilled in April 2007. An updated static and dynamic model forecast an injected gas transit time of between 4 and 8months between CRC-1 injection and Naylor-1 observation wells. Injection began on March 18th 2008 and was halted on August 29th 2009 with 65,445 tonnes of CO2 mixed gas stored. Two pulses of tracer compounds were added to help identify the injected CO2 from other naturally occurring CO2 and to track dispersion and diffusion. Assurance monitoring included surveillance of the atmosphere, soil gas and shallow groundwater. To date, no tracer compounds have been detected above background levels in samples taken as part of the assurance monitoring system. Monitoring of the reservoir has been accomplished with a combined geophysical and geochemical approach. Formation fluids are sampled at pressure with the multilevel U-Tube system. The transient geochemistry at the observation well has: (1) recorded injected gas arrival at the Naylor-1 observation well; (2) recorded tracer compound arrival at Naylor-1; (3) shown a mixing trend between the isotopic signature of the Naylor indigenous CO2 and that of the injection supply gas; and (4) provided an estimate for the dynamic storage capacity for a portion of the Naylor reservoir. The data collected are compared with the pre-injection dynamic model forecasts and provide a means of calibration. The CO2CRC Otway Project has successfully demonstrated the storage of CO2 in a depleted gas field. Geochemical assurance monitoring and reservoir surveillance will continue post injection. Continued analysis of the data will serve to reduce uncertainty in forecasting long term fate of the injected CO2 mixed gas. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

Abstract: The CO2CRC Otway Project in southwestern Victoria, Australia has injected over 17 months 65,445 tonnes of a mixed CO2–CH4 fluid into the water leg of a depleted natural gas reservoir at a depth of ∼2km. Pressurized sub-surface fluids were collected from the Naylor-1 observation well using a tri-level U-tube sampling system located near the crest of the fault-bounded anticlinal trap, 300m up-dip of the CRC-1 gas injection well. Relative to the pre-injection gas–water contact (GWC), only the shallowest U-tube initially accessed the residual methane gas cap. The pre-injection gas cap at Naylor-1 contains CO2 at 1.5mol% compared to 75.4mol% for the injected gas from the Buttress-1 supply well and its CO2 is depleted in 13C by 4.5‰ VPDB compared to the injected supercritical CO2. Additional assurance of the arrival of injected gas at the observation well is provided by the use of the added tracer compounds, CD4, Kr and SF6 in the injected gas stream. The initial breakthrough of the migrating dissolved CO2 front occurs between 100 and 121 days after CO2 injection began, as evidenced by positive responses of both the natural and artificial tracers at the middle U-tube, located an average 2.3m below the pre-injection GWC. The major CO2 increase to ∼60mol% and transition from sampling formation water with dissolved gas to sampling free gas occurred several weeks after the initial breakthrough. After another ∼3 months the CO2 content in the lowest U-tube, a further average 4.5m deeper, increased to ∼60mol%, similarly accompanied by a transition to sampling predominantly gases. Around this time, the CO2 content of the upper U-tube, located in the gas cap and an average 10.4m above the pre-injection GWC, increased to ∼20mol%. Subsequently, the CO2 content in the upper U-tube approaches 30mol% while the lower two U-tubes show a gradual decrease in CO2 to ∼48mol%, resulting from mixing of injected and indigenous fluids and partitioning between dissolved and free gas phases. Lessons learnt from the CO2CRC Otway Project have enabled us to better anticipate the challenges for rapid deployment of carbon storage in a commercial environment at much larger scales. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]

The article offers information on the Otway Project, located in Victoria in Australia. It mentions how the said project provides demonstrations on large-scale carbon capture and storage (CCS) in depleted gas field. Moreover, it features how public consent and risk assessment affects the demonstration of carbon storages.

Graphical abstract Highlights • Carbonate aquifers (calcite surfaces). • Dissolution of organic acid components in crude oil (stearic acid). • CO 2 trapping in deep saline aquifers and depleted hydrocarbon reservoirs and their associated risks in the presence of organic acid components. Abstract Hypothesis CO 2 geological storage (CGS) involves different mechanisms which can store millions of tonnes of CO 2 per year in depleted hydrocarbon reservoirs and deep saline aquifers. But their storage capacity is influenced by the presence of different carboxylic compounds in the reservoir. These molecules strongly affect the water wetness of the rock, which has a dramatic impact on storage capacities and containment security. However, precise understanding of how these carboxylic acids influence the rock's CO 2 -wettability is lacking. Experiments We thus systematically analysed these relationships as a function of pressure, temperature, storage depth and organic acid concentrations. A particular focus was on identifying organic acid concentration thresholds above which storage efficiency may get influenced significantly. Findings These thresholds (defined for structural trapping as a water contact angle θ > 90°; and for capillary trapping when primary drainage is unaffected, i.e. θ > 50°) were very low for structural trapping (∼10−3–10−7 M organic acid concentration C organic) and extremely low for capillary trapping (10−7 M to below 10−10 M C organic). Since minute organic acid concentrations are always present in deep saline aquifers and certainly in depleted hydrocarbon reservoirs, significantly lower storage capacities and containment security than previously thought can be predicted in carbonate reservoirs, and reservoir-scale models and evaluation schemes need to account for these effects to de-risk CGS projects. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Organic geochemical and petrological assessment of coals/coaly shales and fine grained sediments, coupled with organic geochemical analyses of oil samples, all from Permo–Triassic sections of the Southern Sydney Basin (Australia), have enabled identification of the source for the widely distributed oil shows and oil seeps in this region. The Permian coals have higher hydrogen indices, higher liptinite contents, and much higher total organic matter extract yields than the fine grained sediments. A variety of source specific parameters obtained from n-alkanes, regular isoprenoids, terpanes, steranes and diasteranes indicate that the oil shows and seeps were generated and expelled predominantly from higher plant derived organic matter deposited in oxic environments. The source and maturity related biomarkers and aromatic hydrocarbon distributions of the oils are similar to those of the coals. The oil-coal relationship also is demonstrated by similarities in the carbon isotopic composition of the total oils, coal extracts, and their individual n-alkanes. Extracts from the Permo–Triassic fine grained sediments, on the other hand, have organic geochemical signatures indicative of mixed terrestrial and prokaryotic organic matter deposited in suboxic environments, which are significantly different from both the oils and coal extracts. The molecular signatures indicating the presence of prokaryotic organic matter in some of the coal extracts and oils may be due to thin sections of possibly calcareous lithologies interbedded within the coal measures. The genetic relationship between the oils and coals provides new evidence for the generation and expulsion of oils from the Permian coals and raises the possibility for commercial oil accumulations in the Permian and Early Triassic sandstones, potentially in the deeper offshore part of the Sydney Basin. [Copyright &y& Elsevier]