Faults and Fault Properties in Hydrocarbon Flow Models

Manzocchi, Tom; Childs, Conrad; Walsh, John J.

doi:10.1002/9781444394900.ch8

Cited by 41 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 94 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Even assuming constant permeability in the vertical direction within the fault, no correlation has been found between shear slip and CO 2 leakage (38). Furthermore, capillary entry pressure increases with both clay content and reduced pore size, which is what ultimately hinders CO 2 penetration into the fault (39).…”

Section: Significancementioning

confidence: 99%

Geologic carbon storage is unlikely to trigger large earthquakes and reactivate faults through which CO₂could leak

Vilarrasa

Carrera

2015

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

182

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Zoback and Gorelick [(2012) Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 109(26): [10164][10165][10166][10167][10168] have claimed that geologic carbon storage in deep saline formations is very likely to trigger large induced seismicity, which may damage the caprock and ruin the objective of keeping CO 2 stored deep underground. We argue that felt induced earthquakes due to geologic CO 2 storage are unlikely because (i) sedimentary formations, which are softer than the crystalline basement, are rarely critically stressed; (ii) the least stable situation occurs at the beginning of injection, which makes it easy to control; (iii) CO 2 dissolution into brine may help in reducing overpressure; and (iv) CO 2 will not flow across the caprock because of capillarity, but brine will, which will reduce overpressure further. The latter two mechanisms ensure that overpressures caused by CO 2 injection will dissipate in a moderate time after injection stops, hindering the occurrence of postinjection induced seismicity. Furthermore, even if microseismicity were induced, CO 2 leakage through fault reactivation would be unlikely because the high clay content of caprocks ensures a reduced permeability and increased entry pressure along the localized deformation zone. For these reasons, we contend that properly sited and managed geologic carbon storage in deep saline formations remains a safe option to mitigate anthropogenic climate change.

show abstract

Section: Significancementioning

confidence: 99%

Geologic carbon storage is unlikely to trigger large earthquakes and reactivate faults through which CO₂could leak

Vilarrasa

Carrera

2015

Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A.

182

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Lambiase and Bosworth, 1995; Sharp et al, 2000; Hus et al, 2006), and the 35 evolving fluid flow properties of fault zones (e.g. Manzocchi et al, 2010;Seebeck et al, 2014). 36…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Normal fault growth in layered basaltic rocks: The role of strain rate in fault evolution

Bubeck

Walker

Imber

et al. 2018

Journal of Structural Geology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

9Conceptual models for the evolution of dilatant faults in volcanic rift settings involve a step-wise 10 growth pattern, involving upward propagation of subsurface faults, surface monocline formation, 11 which are breached by subvertical, open faults. Immature, discontinuous normal faults are 12 considered representative of the early stages of mature, linked faults that accommodate extensional 13 strains. We consider the evolution of surface-breaking normal faults using a comparison of the 14 distribution and geometry of normal faults from two volcanic rift zones: the Koaʻe fault system, 15Hawaiʻi, and the Krafla fissure swarm, NE Iceland. Field mapping highlights similarities to current 16 predicted geometries, but also prominent differences that are not reconciled by current models. 17Variable deformation styles record magma supply changes within the rift zones, which drive local 18 strain rate gradients. Building on existing studies, we present a conceptual model of fault growth 19 that accounts for spatial and temporal changes in strain rate within the deforming regions. We 20propose that faults in separate rift systems may not advance through the same stages of evolution 21and that faults within individual rift systems can show differing growth patterns. Variations in 22 2 surface strains may be indicative of subsurface magmatic system changes, with important 23 implications for our understanding of volcano-tectonic coupling. 24 25Key words: normal fault; monocline; extension; basalt; volcanic rift 26 27 Introduction 28Normal fault systems comprise discontinuous, non-collinear segments, with overlaps and segment 29 linkage commonly resulting in characteristic overlapping or step-like geometries across a broad 30 range of scales (e.g. Segall and Pollard, 1980;Peacock, 2002; Long and Imber, 2011). Regional 31 extension is conserved ahead of first-order fault terminations by areas of folding and linking faults 32 and fractures (e.g. Morley et al., 1990;Faulds and Varga, 1998). The geometry and distribution of 33 structures within these domains play an important role in the tectono-stratigraphic development of 34 rift basins (e.g. Lambiase and Bosworth, 1995; Sharp et al., 2000; Hus et al., 2006), and the 35 evolving fluid flow properties of fault zones (e.g. Manzocchi et al., 2010;Seebeck et al., 2014). 36Much of our current understanding of the growth of normal fault populations and fault zone 37 architecture is derived from studies of faults in clastic sequences using combinations of: (1) fault 38 analysis and scaling relationships, based on field and seismic data-derived measurements of 39 displacement and length versus width (e.g. Ferrill and Morris, 2001;Peacock, 2002; Walsh et al., 40 2003;Nixon et al., 2014); (2) scaled-analogue modelling (e.g. Holland et al., 2006; Tentler and 41 Acocella, 2010); and (3) numerical-based modelling techniques (e.g. Crider and Pollard, 1998; 42 Maerten et al., 2002;Schöpfer et al., 2006). Many of these studies have focussed on fault 43 propagation and se...

show abstract

“…It has been possible to incorporate some of these complexities into existing modelling tools (e.g. Manzocchi et al 2010). However, the authors contend that new analytical and intuitive visualization methods are needed to enhance or replace those that were developed over a decade ago when requirements were simpler.…”

Section: Fault Dominated Compartmentalizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reservoir compartmentalization: an introduction

Jolley

Fisher

Ainsworth

2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Reservoir Compartmentalization -the segregation of a petroleum accumulation into a number of individual fluid/pressure compartments -occurs when flow is prevented across 'sealed' boundaries in the reservoir. These boundaries are caused by a variety of geological and fluid dynamic factors, but there are two basic types: 'static seals' that are completely sealed and capable of withholding (trapping) petroleum columns over geological time; and 'dynamic seals' that are low to very low permeability flow baffles that reduce petroleum crossflow to infinitesimally slow rates. The latter allow fluids and pressures to equilibrate across a boundary over geological time-scales, but act as seals over production time-scales, because they prevent crossflow at normal production rates -such that fluid contacts, saturations and pressures progressively segregate into 'dynamic' compartments.

show abstract

Faults and Fault Properties in Hydrocarbon Flow Models

Cited by 41 publications

References 94 publications

Geologic carbon storage is unlikely to trigger large earthquakes and reactivate faults through which CO₂could leak

Geologic carbon storage is unlikely to trigger large earthquakes and reactivate faults through which CO₂could leak

Normal fault growth in layered basaltic rocks: The role of strain rate in fault evolution

Reservoir compartmentalization: an introduction

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Faults and Fault Properties in Hydrocarbon Flow Models

Cited by 41 publications

References 94 publications

Geologic carbon storage is unlikely to trigger large earthquakes and reactivate faults through which CO2could leak

Geologic carbon storage is unlikely to trigger large earthquakes and reactivate faults through which CO2could leak

Normal fault growth in layered basaltic rocks: The role of strain rate in fault evolution

Reservoir compartmentalization: an introduction

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Geologic carbon storage is unlikely to trigger large earthquakes and reactivate faults through which CO₂could leak

Geologic carbon storage is unlikely to trigger large earthquakes and reactivate faults through which CO₂could leak