In this study, the kinetics of flue gas hydrate formation in bulk water in the presence of selected amino acids and surfactants are investigated. Four amino acids (3000 ppm) are selected based on different hydropathy index. Constant-ramping and isothermal experiments at 120 bar pressure and 1 °C temperature are carried out to compare their hydrate promotion capabilities with surfactant sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS) (500–3000 ppm) and water. Based on experimental results, we report the correlation between hydrate promotion capability of amino acids and their hydrophobicity. Hydrophobic amino acids show stronger flue gas hydrate promotion capability than water and hydrophilic amino acids. We discuss the controlling mechanisms to differentiate between promoters and inhibitors’ roles among the amino acids. Between 2000–3000 ppm concentrations, hydrophobic amino acids have near similar promotion capabilities as SDS. This research highlights the potential use of amino acids as promoters or inhibitors for various applications.

Sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS) is a well-known surfactant, which can accelerate methane hydrate formation. In this work, methane hydrate formation kinetics were studied in the presence of SDS using a rocking cell apparatus in both temperature-ramping and isothermal modes. Ramping and isothermal experiments together suggest that SDS concentration plays a vital role in the formation kinetics of methane hydrate, both in terms of induction time and of final gas uptake. There is a trade-off between growth rate and gas uptake for the optimum SDS concentration, such that an increase in SDS concentration decreases the induction time but also decreases the gas storage capacity for a given volume. The experiments also confirm the potential use of the rocking cell for investigating hydrate promoters. It allows multiple systems to run in parallel at similar experimental temperature and pressure conditions, thus shortening the total experimentation time. Understanding methane hydrate formation and storage using SDS can facilitate large-scale applications such as natural gas storage and transportation.

CO2-rich gas injection into natural gas hydrate reservoirs is proposed as a carbon-neutral, novel technique to store CO2 while simultaneously producing CH4 gas from methane hydrate deposits without disturbing geological settings. This method is limited by the mass transport barrier created by hydrate film formation at the liquid–gas interface. The very low gas diffusivity through hydrate film formed at this interface causes low CO2 availability at the gas–hydrate interface, thus lowering the recovery and replacement efficiency during CH4-CO2 exchange. In a first-of-its-kind study, we have demonstrate the successful application of low dosage methanol to enhance gas storage and recovery and compare it with water and other surface-active kinetic promoters including SDS and L-methionine. Our study shows 40–80% CH4 recovery, 83–93% CO2 storage and 3–10% CH4-CO2 replacement efficiency in the presence of 5 wt% methanol, and further improvement in the swapping process due to a change in temperature from 1–4 °C is observed. We also discuss the influence of initial water saturation (30–66%), hydrate morphology (grain-coating and pore-filling) and hydrate surface area on the CH4-CO2 hydrate swapping. Very distinctive behavior in methane recovery caused by initial water saturation (above and below Swi = 0.35) and hydrate morphology is also discussed. Improved CO2 storage and methane recovery in the presence of methanol is attributed to its dual role as anti-agglomerate and thermodynamic driving force enhancer between CH4-CO2 hydrate phase boundaries when methanol is used at a low concentration (5 wt%). The findings of this study can be useful in exploring the usage of low dosage, bio-friendly, anti-agglomerate and hydrate inhibition compounds in improving CH4 recovery and storing CO2 in hydrate reservoirs without disturbing geological formation. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first experimental study to explore the novel application of an anti-agglomerate and hydrate inhibitor in low dosage to address the CO2 hydrate mass transfer barrier created at the gas–liquid interface to enhance CH4-CO2 hydrate exchange. Our study also highlights the importance of prior information about methane hydrate reservoirs, such as residual water saturation, degree of hydrate saturation and hydrate morphology, before applying the CH4-CO2 hydrate swapping technique.

This paper reports the formation and dissociation pattern of hydrate crystals with varying compositions of CH4 and CO2 in porous media. Direct visualization was carried out using a high-pressure, water-wet, silicon wafer-based micromodel with a pore network resembling sandstone rock. Hydrate crystals were formed under reservoir conditions (P = 45–65 bar and T = 1.7–3.5 °C) from either a two-phase system consisting of liquid water and a CH4–CO2 gas mixture or a three-phase system consisting of liquid water, CH4-rich gas, and CO2-rich liquid. A stepwise pressure reduction method was later applied to visualize multiple dissociation events occurring between the equilibrium pressures of pure CH4 hydrates and pure CO2 hydrates. The results showed that liberated gas from the initial dissociation became trapped and immobilized by surrounding undissociated hydrate crystals when the initial hydrate saturation was high. Mixing of liberated gas with liquid water led to rapid reformation of hydrates during the stepwise pressure reduction; the reformed hydrate crystals dissociated at a lower pressure close to the equilibrium pressure of pure CO2 hydrates. The results demonstrate the possibility of producing gas liberated from local hydrate dissociation while simultaneously reforming hydrates in other parts of the sediments. This is relevant for the proposed production method where CO2 injection in CH4 hydrate reservoirs is followed by pressure depletion to enhance the CH4 gas recovery.

No abstract