On scale and magnitude of pressure build‐up induced by large‐scale geologic storage of CO₂

Abstract

Abstr actThe scale and magnitude of pressure perturbation and brine migration induced by geologic carbon sequestration is discussed assuming a full-scale deployment scenario in which enough CO 2 is captured and stored to make relevant contributions to global climate change mitigation. In this scenario, the volumetric rates and cumulative volumes of CO 2 injection would be comparable to or higher than those related to existing deepsubsurface injection and extraction activities, such as oil production. Large-scale pressure buildup in response to the injection may limit the dynamic storage capacity of suitable formations, because over-pressurization may fracture the caprock, may drive CO 2 /brine leakage through localized pathways, and may cause induced seismicity. On the other hand, laterally extensive sedimentary basins may be less affected by such limitations because (1) local pressure effects are moderated by pressure propagation and brine displacement into regions far away from the CO 2 storage domain, and (2) diffuse and/or localized brine migration into overlying and underlying formations allows for pressure bleed-off in the vertical direction. A quick analytical estimate of the extent of pressure buildup induced by industrial-scale CO 2 projects is presented. Also discussed are pressure perturbation and attenuation effects simulated for two representative sedimentary basins in the U.S.: the laterally extensive Illinois Basin and the partially compartmentalized southern San Joaquin Basin, California. These studies show that the limiting effect of pressure buildup on dynamic storage capacity is not as significant as suggested by EhligEconomides and Economides 1 , who considered closed systems without any attenuation effects.

Salinity of deep groundwater in California: Water quantity, quality, and protection

“…Fluid injections into deeper formations, such as water disposal and waterflooding for enhanced oil/gas recovery, are ongoing and will continue to occur in California (54,55). In addition, geologic storage of CO 2 (56,57) …”

Impact-driven pressure management via targeted brine extraction—Conceptual studies of CO2 storage in saline formations

“…For geologic carbon sequestration (GCS) to have a positive effect on reducing or at least stabilizing atmospheric carbon levels, the anticipated volume of CO 2 that would need to be injected in the subsurface is very large (e.g., Zhou and Birkholzer, 2011). One single coal-fired power plant alone may emit as much as 5-10 million tons of CO 2 per year.…”

Effects of the distribution and evolution of the coefficient of friction along a fault on the assessment of the seismic activity associated with a hypothetical industrial-scale geologic CO2 sequestration operation

“…The 3D basin-scale reservoir model extends to a depth of 3.5 km, and laterally 84 km in the eastern and 122 km in the northern direction (Wainwright et al, 2013;Zhou and Birkholzer, 2011). Eleven formations from the crystalline base rock to the top shallow aquifer are represented, as are the Greeley, PPC and New Hope fault zones (Fig.…”

“…We develop different scenarios in which the fault strength is changed and analyze geomechanical fault stability response during a hypothetical carbon sequestration project initially planned at an industrial-scale in the Southern San Joaquin Basin in California, USA (Fig. 1a) Wainwright et al, 2013;Zhou and Birkholzer, 2011). We conduct nine simulations in which the distribution of the coefficients of static and dynamic friction are changed to simulated a hardening and softening phase before and during rupture.…”