Optimization of well placement, CO2 injection rates, and brine cycling for geological carbon sequestration

Cameron, David; Durlofsky, Louis J.

doi:10.1016/j.ijggc.2012.06.003

Cited by 82 publications

(42 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Injection can be engineered to enhance or speed up trapping (King and Paterson, 2002;Juanes et al, 2006;Cameron and Durlofsky, 2012). One way to achieve optimal trapping is to plan the injection site, location of the well and injection rates such that the plume will naturally migrate, under the influence of buoyancy and in the presence of a natural groundwater flow; as the CO 2 moves, it will leave behind a trail of trapped ganglia.…”

Section: Engineering Capillary Trappingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…More active strategies to increase capillary trapping include co-injection of CO 2 and brine, the injection of chase brine after injection (Juanes et al, 2006;Qi et al, 2009) and recycling produced brine (Cameron and Durlofsky, 2012). In this case, capillary trapping is artificially enhanced, as water is injected deliberately into the formation to trap CO 2 .…”

Section: Engineering Capillary Trappingmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Capillary trapping for geologic carbon dioxide storage – From pore scale physics to field scale implications

Krevor

Blunt

Benson

et al. 2015

International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control

408

250

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tA significant amount of theoretical, numerical and observational work has been published focused on various aspects of capillary trapping in CO 2 storage since the IPCC Special Report on Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage (2005). This research has placed capillary trapping in a central role in nearly every aspect of the geologic storage of CO 2 . Capillary, or residual, trapping -where CO 2 is rendered immobile in the pore space as disconnected ganglia, surrounded by brine in a storage aquifer -is controlled by fluid and interfacial physics at the size scale of rock pores. These processes have been observed at the pore scale in situ using X-ray microtomography at reservoir conditions. A large database of conventional centimetre core scale observations for flow modelling are now available for a range of rock types and reservoir conditions. These along with the pore scale observations confirm that trapped saturations will be at least 10% and more typically 30% of the pore volume of the rock, stable against subsequent displacement by brine and characteristic of water-wet systems. Capillary trapping is pervasive over the extent of a migrating CO 2 plume and both theoretical and numerical investigations have demonstrated the first order impacts of capillary trapping on plume migration, immobilisation and CO 2 storage security. Engineering strategies to maximise capillary trapping have been proposed that make use of injection schemes that maximise sweep or enhance imbibition. National assessments of CO 2 storage capacity now incorporate modelling of residual trapping where it can account for up to 95% of the storage resource. Field scale observations of capillary trapping have confirmed the formation and stability of residually trapped CO 2 at masses up to 10,000 tons and over time scales of years. Significant outstanding uncertainties include the impact of heterogeneity on capillary immobilisation and capillary trapping in mixed-wet systems. Overall capillary trapping is well constrained by laboratory and field scale observations, effectively modelled in theoretical and numerical models and significantly enhances storage integrity, both increasing storage capacity and limiting the rate and extent of plume migration.

show abstract

Section: Engineering Capillary Trappingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Engineering Capillary Trappingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Capillary trapping for geologic carbon dioxide storage – From pore scale physics to field scale implications

Krevor

Blunt

Benson

et al. 2015

International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control

408

250

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The well configurations we consider are also common for CO 2 storage simulations. For example, Juanes et al (2006) and Cameron and Durlofsky (2012) …”

Section: Problem Setup and Fine-scale Simulationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Upscaling of CO2 injection into brine with capillary heterogeneity effects

Rabinovich

Itthisawatpan

Durlofsky

2015

Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Substantial attention has been paid to well spacing and placement optimisation for maximising CO 2 storage and capacity (Cameron and Durlofsky 2012;Vogt 2013;Cihan et al 2015;Chen et al 2015;Babaei et al 2015). In addition to well spacing, there are numerous operation parameters to be treated as state variables of optimisation, such as number of wells, angle of preformation and inclination, and injection scheduling.…”

Section: Simulation Runsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Integrated Carbon Sequestration–Geothermal Heat Recovery: Performance Comparison Between Open and Close Systems

Babaei

2018

Transp Porous Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper, the lateral boundaries for a theoretical homogeneous, isotropic, horizontal, 3-dimensional sedimentary hot aquifer were prescribed by either unhindered open to fluid and heat flow, or compartmentalised fully close boundary conditions. CO 2 injection was administered through three well patterns of varying well spacing and numbers: 3 × 3 (5 injection wells and 4 production wells, 750-m well spacing), 5 × 5 (13 injection wells and 12 production wells, 500-m well spacing), and 7 × 7 (25 injection wells and 24 production wells, 375-m well spacing). To assess the effects of boundary conditions and well spacing on a combined carbon sequestration-geothermal heat recovery process, number of output metrics such as net cumulative CO 2 stored, volumetric storage efficiency, geothermal heat recovery and pressure build-up were quantified in 54 simulation runs. Based on the assumption made and conditions that the simulation, it was shown that for a typical and more common fewer well number cases, the open versus close boundaries have critical role in determining the effectiveness of operation. (a) Open boundary conditions may counter-intuitively lead to heat recovery relative deficiencies if the pressure gradient stays largely towards the outside of the system (pressure of system > pressure of surrounding). This, however, will benefit CO 2 injectivity and storage efficiency by providing escape paths for fluids (CO 2 and brine). (b) Close boundary conditions will universally be beneficial for fluid and heat production purposes; however, the excessive pressure build-up can significantly affect the operation duration length. For economically unjustifiable cases with high number of wells, the effects of boundary conditions were shown to be reduced by effective fluid extraction from the medium, thereby enhancing the geothermal heat recovery and avoiding pressure build-up. The research delineated no significant effect of boundary conditions on salt precipitation.Keywords Carbon sequestration in geothermal aquifers · Geothermal heat recovery · Open and close boundary conditions · CO 2 -plume geothermal · CO 2 storage efficiency · Thermal numerical simulation B Masoud Babaei

show abstract

Optimization of well placement, CO2 injection rates, and brine cycling for geological carbon sequestration

Cited by 82 publications

References 37 publications

Capillary trapping for geologic carbon dioxide storage – From pore scale physics to field scale implications

Capillary trapping for geologic carbon dioxide storage – From pore scale physics to field scale implications

Upscaling of CO2 injection into brine with capillary heterogeneity effects

Integrated Carbon Sequestration–Geothermal Heat Recovery: Performance Comparison Between Open and Close Systems

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About