×

Estimate CO\(_{2}\) storage capacity of the Johansen formation: numerical investigations beyond the benchmarking exercise. (English) Zbl 1190.86015

Summary: Shell’s in-house reservoir simulator MoReS is applied to a recently introduced CO\(_{2}\) sequestration benchmark problem. The principal objective of this benchmark is the simulation of CO\(_{2}\) distribution within a modeling region, and leakage of CO\(_{2}\) outside of it, for a period of 50 years. This study goes beyond the benchmarking exercise to investigate additional factors with direct relevance to CO\(_{2}\) storage capacity estimations: water and gas relative permeabilities, permeability anisotropy, presence of sub-seismic features (conductive fractures, thin shale layers), regional hydrodynamic gradient, CO\(_{2}\)-enriched brine convection (due to brine density differences), and injection rates. The effects of hydrodynamic gradients and gravitationally induced convection only become significant over 100 s of years. This study has thus extended simulation time to 1,000 years. It is shown that grid resolution significantly impacts results. Vertical-grid refinement results in larger and thinner CO\(_{2}\) plumes. Lateral-grid refinement delays leakage out of the model domain and reduces injection pressure for a given injection rate. Sub-seismic geological features such as fractures/faults and shale layers are demonstrated to have impact on CO\(_{2}\) sequestration. Fractures located up-dip from the injector may lead to more leakage while the opposite may happen in the presence of fractures perpendicular to the dip. Thin shale layers produce stacked CO\(_{2}\) blankets. They should be explicitly represented instead of being upscaled using a reduced vertical to horizontal permeability ratio. Results are seen to be far more sensitive to gas relative permeability and hysteresis than to variations in the water relative permeability models used. For a multi-injectors project, there is scope to optimize the phasing of injections to avoid potential fracturing near injectors.

MSC:

86A60 Geological problems
86-08 Computational methods for problems pertaining to geophysics
Full Text: DOI

References:

[1] Eigestad, G.T., Dahle, H.K., Hellevang, B., Johansen, W.T., Riis, F., Oian, E.: Geological modeling and simulation of CO2 injection in the Johansen formation. Computat. Geosci. (submitted) · Zbl 1190.86012
[2] Class, H., Dahle, H., Riis, F., Ebigbo, A., Eigestad, G.: Numerical Investigations of CO2 Sequestration in Geological Formations: Problem-Oriented Benchmarks Problem 3: Estimation of the CO2 Storage Capacity of a Geological Formation. Corrected version on January 17, 2008 ( http://www.iws.uni-stuttgart.de/co2-workshop/ )
[3] Regtien, J.M.M., Por, G.J.A., van Stiphout, M.T., van der Vlugt, F.F.: Interactive reservoir simulation. SPE-029146, in proceedings of the 13th SPE Symposium on Reservoir Simulation held in San Antonio, TX, USA, 12–15 Feb 1995
[4] Verlaan, M., Boerrigter, P., Oedai, S., van Dorp, J.: Experimental investigation of steam injection in light oil fractured carbonates. SPE-113464, in proceedings of the 2008 SPE/DOE Improved Oil Recovery Symposium held in Tulsa, Oklahoma, USA, 19–23 April 2008
[5] Harvey, A.H.: Semi-empirical correlation for Henry’s constants over large temperature ranges. AIChE J. 42(5), 1491–1494 (1996). doi: 10.1002/aic.690420531 · doi:10.1002/aic.690420531
[6] Bakker, R.J.: Package fluids 1. Computer programs for analysis of fluid inclusion data and for modeling bulk fluid properties. Chem. Geol. 194, 2–23 (2003). doi: 10.1016/S0009-2541(02)00268-1 · doi:10.1016/S0009-2541(02)00268-1
[7] Garcia, J.E.: Density of Aqueous Solutions of CO2. Technical Report–Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (2001)
[8] Class, H., Ebigbo, A., Helmig, R., Dahle, H., Nordbotten, J.M., Celia, M.A., Audigane, P., Darcis, M., Ennis-King, J., Fan, Y., Flemisch, B., Gasda, S., Jin, M., Krug, S., Labregere, D., Naderi, A., Pawar, R.J., Sbai, A., Thomas, S.G., Trenty, L., Wei, L.: A benchmark-study on problems related to CO2 storage in geologic formations–Summary and discussion of the results. Computat. Geosci. (submitted) · Zbl 1190.86011
[9] Al Salhi, M., Van Rijen, M., Wei, L., Dijk, H., Alias, Z., Upadhyaya, A., Lee, H.: Structured uncertainty assessment for a mature field through the application of experimental design and response surface methods. SPE Paper 93529, the 14th SPE Middle East Oil & Gas Show and Conference held in Bahrain International Exhibition Centre, Bahrain (2005)
[10] Arts, R., Eiken, O., Chadwick, A., Zweigel, P., Van Der Meer, B., Kirby, G.: Seismic monitoring at the Sleipner underground CO 2 storage site (North Sea). In: Baines, S.J., Worden, R.H. (eds.) ”Geological Storage of Carbon Dioxide”, vol. 233, pp. 181–191. Geological Society, London (2004)
[11] Riaz, A., Hesse, M., Tchelepi, H.A., Orr, F.M.: Onset of convection in a gravitationally unstable diffusive boundary layer in porous media. J. Fluid Mech. 548, 87–111 (2006). doi: 10.1017/S0022112005007494 · doi:10.1017/S0022112005007494
[12] Chan, M.A., Parry, W.T., Bowman, J.R.: Diagenetic hematite and manganese oxides and fault-related fluid flow. AAPG Bull. 84, 1281–1310 (2000)
[13] Haszeldine, R.S., Quinn, O., England, G., Wilkinson, M., Shipton, Z.K., Evans, J.P., Heath, J., Crossey, L., Ballentine, C.J., Graham, C.M.: Natural geochemical analogues for carbon dioxide storage in deep geological porous reservoirs, a United Kingdom perspective. Oil Gas Sci. Technol.–Rev. IFP 60, 33–49 (2005) · doi:10.2516/ogst:2005004
This reference list is based on information provided by the publisher or from digital mathematics libraries. Its items are heuristically matched to zbMATH identifiers and may contain data conversion errors. In some cases that data have been complemented/enhanced by data from zbMATH Open. This attempts to reflect the references listed in the original paper as accurately as possible without claiming completeness or a perfect matching.