Evaluating CO ₂ retention risk of geological sequestration sites: physical, time-scale, and site style considerations

Abstract

With some exceptions, such as fluid phase, pressure evolution, and reservoir geometry, evaluation of CO 2 retention for geological sequestration sites primarily involves well-established seal and trap concepts and methods developed by the petroleum industry. Inputs to a CO 2 retention evaluation (e.g., bed seal capacity analysis) include CO 2 phase, CO 2 and brine density, reservoir pressure and temperature, rock properties, and stress state. The inputs are used to perform capillary and mechanical seal analyses similar to the petroleum industry, but unlike hydrocarbons, CO 2 retention also occurs within the reservoir pore volume by capillary and solubility trapping, adding additional requirement for analyses using reservoir engineering concepts and methodology. Reservoir geometry types for CO 2 storage include conventional traps (depleted hydrocarbon fields, brine-filled traps) and brine-filled reservoirs that lack a conventional trap geometry (e.g., a monocline). Each geometry style and project phase (injection, near-term post-injection, long-term static) requires different retention considerations, for example the CO 2 plume extent and height. Based on a retention evaluation, retention risk and uncertainty may be articulated using a qualitative risk matrix that facilitates early screening, identification of data needs, possible mitigating strategies, and comparisons across a portfolio of potential sites. Thematic collection: This article is part of the Geoscience workflows for CO 2 storage collection available at: https://www.lyellcollection.org/topic/collections/geoscience-workflows-for-CO2-storage

CO2/Water Interfacial Tension under Induced Acidic Conditions Employing Dissipative Particle Dynamics Simulations

“…19 Appropriate quantification of the IFT associated with CO 2 −water systems is required for evaluating the possible risk associated with CO 2 leakage through caprock. 20,21 Increased IFT readings observed in CO 2 −water systems imply a reduced interaction between the water in the caprock and the injected CO 2. This ultimately contributes to an improved ability of the caprock for CO 2 retention.…”