Carbon Dioxide Geological Storage: Monitoring Technologies Review

Characteristic length measurement of a subsurface gas anomaly—A monitoring approach for heterogeneous flow path distributions

“…A large number of potential technologies for CO 2 monitoring already exist, as summarized in the literature (e.g. Chadwick, 2008;Chadwick et al, 2009;Jenkins et al, 2015;Litynski et al, 2012;Liu, 2012). Technologies and methods available for near-surface and surface monitoring include: groundwater monitoring (e.g.…”

“…Leakage from such a repository may occur along faults, fractures, or faulty, poorly plugged, corroded, or old abandoned wellbores (Liu, 2012;Tsang et al, 2008). Preferential gas flow paths can be activated by changing stress, earthquakes, or geochemical reactions, whereas structural deformations and fractures could also be a consequence of the CO 2 injection itself (Liu and Smirnov, 2009;Tsang et al, 2008).…”

Storage capacity enhancement and reservoir management using water extraction: Four site case studies

“…All simulation scenarios were developed to compare the effects of different injection and extraction scenarios under several geologic conditions in an attempt to improve CO 2 storage capacity and manage the storage reservoirs. In addition, CO 2 plume and pressure management strategies were investigated to analyze the potential decrease in risk by controlling the CO 2 plume and decreasing reservoir pressure associated with CO 2 storage (IEA Greenhouse Gas R&D Programme, 2012; Liu et al, 2012;Klapperich et al, 2012). More detailed results for the entire study can be found in the published report (IEA Greenhouse Gas R&D Programme, 2012).…”

“…Carbon capture and storage (CCS) is a technology to reduce carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) emissions to the atmosphere by storing large quantities of CO 2 in deep geologic reservoirs. Several geological options for CCS have been considered, including coal beds (White et al, 2005;Smirnov, 2007, 2008), depleted oil/gas reservoirs (Shaw and Bachu, 2002;Kovscek, 2002;Flett et al, 2005), and deep saline formations (DSFs) (Bachu and Adams, 2003;Kumar et al, 2005;Holloway et al, 2004;Liu, 2012). DSFs are the largest potential CO 2 storage resources and have received increased attention in recent years.…”

“…Additional research is needed that takes into account the real/potential CO 2 storage site structure and geologic properties with various optimization scenarios for injection and production wells (IEA Greenhouse Gas R&D Programme, 2012), ultimately estimating CO 2 storage capacity dynamically with consideration of injectivity and reservoir pressure interference through the use of reservoir simulation. As a result, this study was undertaken to investigate 1) how much CO 2 storage capacity can be increased by implementing water extraction; 2) how reservoir pressure buildup varies under different reservoir conditions, including geologic heterogeneity structures, and fluid properties; 3) the effects on the CO 2 plume movement with water extraction; and 4) how injection and extraction scenarios can be optimized (IEA Greenhouse Gas R&D Programme, 2012; Liu et al, 2012;Klapperich et al, 2012;Saini et al, 2013). In this study, four CO 2 storage sites were selected: the Ketzin project site in Germany, the Zama oil field in Canada, the Gorgon project site in Australia, and the Teapot Dome oil field in the United States, as shown in Fig.…”