A comparative analysis of risk assessment methodologies for the geologic storage of carbon dioxide

Cóndor, José; Unatrakarn, Datchawan; Wilson, Malcolm; Asghari, Koorosh

doi:10.1016/j.egypro.2011.02.345

Cited by 32 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The various options that have been presented above are not the only ones that have been used in the field of CO 2 capture and storage [10].…”

Section: Common Methodologies For Risk Analysis and Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…That assessment would help to guide the development of monitoring tools that will enable in early detection and remediation. As geological storage of CO 2 is a relatively new research area, new methods are being proposed to perform risk analysis and assessments and there is no well -established method for this purpose [10]. The methodologies developed for CO 2 long-term storage risk assessments are essentially based on the determination of the storage formation potential for retaining CO 2 overtime and, therefore, attempt to determine the long term behaviour of CO 2 initially injected into the formation.…”

Section: Common Methodologies For Risk Analysis and Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Security Assessment on Geological Storage of CO2: Application to Hontomin Site

Hurtado¹,

Eguilior²,

Recreo³

2016

Geologic Carbon Sequestration

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The safety and risk assessment of CO 2 storage in geological formations requires a robust and iterative methodology based on an objective assessment, which shall provide an analysis and assessment of potential risks to health, safety and environment. The application of this methodology from the initial stages of the project will facilitate achieving its objectives. The results of the methodology should be twofold: the quality of the site from the point of view of the risks and the associated uncertainties. In the early stages of a project involving scarcely known natural systems, the methodology should take into account the unavoidable uncertainties in the available information and its impact on the risks, through a formalized quantification of those. In these phases the models used are mainly qualitative. As the project progresses and more information is available, the risk assessment methodology should allow gradual and continuous transition from qualitative data based models to quantitative ones.Taking all these into account, in this work are presented the methodologies commonly used, based on those developed and fine-tuning for the past 20 or 30 years to the study of Deep Geological Repositories of high-level nuclear wastes, as well as the development carried out to estimate the risks of Hontomín Technological Development Plant, implemented under the formalism of Bayesian Networks (BNs).

show abstract

“…The various options that have been presented above are not the only ones that have been used in the field of CO 2 capture and storage [10].…”

Section: Common Methodologies For Risk Analysis and Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Common Methodologies For Risk Analysis and Assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Security Assessment on Geological Storage of CO2: Application to Hontomin Site

Hurtado¹,

Eguilior²,

Recreo³

2016

Geologic Carbon Sequestration

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Based on Condor et al (2011) andNETL (2013), the main qualitative methods for risk assessment of CGS Projects are summarised in Table 1: vulnerability evaluation framework (VEF), structured what-if technique (SWIFT), organised and systemic method of risk analysis (MOSAR), features, events and processes analysis (FEP analysis), carbon storage scenario identification framework (CASSIF), screening and ranking framework (SRF), and multi-criteria assessment (MCA). For a comparative analysis of the risk assessment methods and the aspects influencing the estimated risk each method was evaluated according to how it complied with the following aspects: cause or initiating event, frequency, severity, uncertainty and safeguard.…”

Section: Main Methods Available In Literaturementioning

confidence: 99%

“…The mapping of the uncertainty of frequency and severity in the RA-CO 2 method was adopted based on SWIFT, CASSIF, FEP and SRF methods. Although these methods handle uncertainty in different ways, the mapping of the uncertainty is an important point in the RA-CO 2 method because it is one of the greatest challenges for CCS projects as discussed by authors as Condor et al (2011), Koornneef et al (2012), Roberts et al (2011), Polson et al (2012. Paté-Cornell (1996), for example, presents different levels of uncertainty treatment in risk analysis mainly from a quantitative viewpoint.…”

Section: Background To the Ra-co 2 Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…According to Wu and Olson (2009), complexity and uncertainty in many practical applications require new methods and tools what are not different for CO 2 long-term storage because geophysical and geomechanical changes in the geological formation, the presence of population and the reservoir features may modify the characteristics of CO 2 storage and consequently the complexity of risk analysis. For this reason, there is a difficulty of characterising or defining this natural system completely and this is among the factors that contribute to risk estimate for the geological storage as well as to uncertainty regarding the site performance (CSLF, 1 2009;Condor et al, 2011). The level of uncertainty, which also influence storage risk, is an important factor to estimate CO 2 storage capacity and is discussed by Bradshaw et al (2007), Frailey andFinley (2009), andSzulczewski et al (2012).…”

Section: Risks In Cgs Projectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Qualitative risk assessment for using a mature oil field as a pilot experiment of CO<SUB align="right">2 geological storage in Brazil

Paraguassú¹,

Câmara²,

Rocha³

et al. 2013

IJETM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Carbon geological storage (CGS) projects are designed to securely store carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) for thousands of years. Because of this, there are several studies to evaluate the potential risks of long-term storage of CO 2 in geological formations. This paper presents a new method for the qualitative risk assessment of CGS: the risk assessment of stored CO 2 (RA-CO 2 ) method. It consists of the systematic and structured identification of CO 2 release risk scenarios arising from: seal, well, and fault and fracture zones. The uncertainties associated to each mapped risk scenario and the risks are qualitatively evaluated using the RA-CO 2 method. The characteristics of the RA-CO 2 method enable a comprehensive understanding of the underground evolution and future behaviour of the CO 2 in various time scales and their influence on safety. For future studies, the validation of the proposed RA-CO 2 method using a real case study is recommended.Keywords: risk assessment of stored CO 2 ; RA-CO 2 method; qualitative risk assessment; CO 2 leakage; CO 2 geological storage; CGS.Reference to this paper should be made as follows: Paraguassú, M.M., Câmara, G., Rocha, P.S. and Andrade, J.C.S. (2015) 'An approach to assess risks of carbon geological storage technology', Int.

show abstract