CO2 geological storage
Methodologies, capacity and options
Dr Yves-Michel Le Nindre - BRGM
CCS in Power Sector in India, January 22nd – 23rd, 2008 – Delhi
Storage is the necessary complement to other
mitigation efforts, but…
• If technological solutions exist for capture and transport,
storage is facing to the geological uncertainty
• Solutions and performances vary
• And industrial constraints differ
CCS in Power Sector in India, January 22nd – 23rd, 2008 – Delhi
A number of projects have proved the feasibility of geological storage
1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010
EU FP3
EU FP4
JOULE
SACS
SACS2
CO2STORE
EU FP5
EU FP6
CO2 Capture Project
GESTCO
NASCENT
WEYBURN I
II
CO2NET
CO2NET2
CO2NET
CASTOR
CO2GeoNet
ULCOS
InCa-CO2
EU GeoCapacity
CO2ReMoVe
GRASP
INTAS
StraCO2
SAMCARDS
PICOR - A
FR - RTPG
PICOR B-C
FR -ACI INSU/CNRS
Séq. Géol. CO2
PICOREF
GASIM
FR - RPI
THESE
PICOREF
INJECTIVITE
INTEGRITE
MONITORING
FR -ANR
CRISCO2
GAZ ANNEXES
HETEROGENEITES
FR - ADEME
Example from BRGM involvement
SOCECO2
METSTOR
CCS in Power Sector in India, January 22nd – 23rd, 2008 – Delhi
Conditions of storage must guarantee efficiency and
safety for centuries
•
Understanding
phenomena
•
Selection of
proper sites
•
Predictive
modelling
•
Monitoring,
Measure and
Verification
•
Risk assessment
and mitigation
•
Regulations and
standards
CCS in Power Sector in India, January 22nd – 23rd, 2008 – Delhi
From regional exploration to industrial storage
Industrial storage 1-10 Mt/y
Pilot site 10,000 t – 0.5 Mt/y
Site selection & characterisation
Large scale sources & sinks matching
The type of storage: EOR, aquifer, coal seam, must match the CO2 flux
from the emission source
CCS in Power Sector in India, January 22nd – 23rd, 2008 – Delhi
General workflow
Investigation area
Emission data bases
Regional geology
Large scale
sources & sinks matching
Generic studies,
natural analogues
Basin analysis
Site selection
& characterisation
Economy, permitting,
social acceptance
Reservoir & cap rock
simulations
Pilot site 10,000t – 0.5Mt/y
Risk assessment
Monitoring and verification
Industrial storage 1-10 Mt/y
CCS in Power Sector in India, January 22nd – 23rd, 2008 – Delhi
Two philosophies of sink and sources matching
Academic
Industrial
150 Km
Sources inventory
100 Km
Sinks description
Classical, from regional
inventories to selection
Pre-screening, given a
selected plant and radius,
CCS in Power Sector in India, January 22nd – 23rd, 2008 – Delhi
First step - Mapping major CO2 emission points
and storage opportunities (EU GeoCapacity project)
WP 1.1
inventory of
major CO2
emissions points
for all countries
WP 1.1
Input routes and
barriers
WP 1.1
Input gas
storage, HC &
coal fields,
case studies
WP 2
Geocapacity in
aquifers,
geothermal and
other reservoirs
WP 1.2
GIS mapping of
new inputs and
of existing data
WP 3
Geocapacity in
HC fields and
ECBM
WP 1.3
EU maps of
emission and
geological
storage
CCS in Power Sector in India, January 22nd – 23rd, 2008 – Delhi
Storage in aquifers: Permian Rotliegend
(EU GESTCO project)
•
•
•
Example of
extensive aquifer in
northern Europe
Eolian
Extent and facies of
the Permian
Rotliegend from UK
to Polish Basin
Neighbouring major
CO2 emitters
!(
!(
!(
SSAB Oxelosund AB
Scunthorpe Steel Works
Lacustrine
Port Talbot Steel Works
!(
!(
Dunkirk Plant
Hoogovens Steel
!(
!(
CSP Plant
Bruckhausen Plant
Beeckerwerth Plant
!( !(
Fluvial
Salzgitter Plant
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
Linz Plant
Kuncice
!(
CCS in Power Sector in India, January 22nd – 23rd, 2008 – Delhi
Storage in HC fields and coal seams
Geocapacity in
hydrocarbon structures
and EOR potential
Scunthorpe
!(
Bremen
!(
IJmuiden
!(
!(
Salzgitter
Dunkirk
Duisburg Duisburg
!(
!(!(
!(
Bruckhausen
!(
!(
Dortmund
!(
!(
!(
Geocapacity in coal beds
!(
and ECBM potential
Scunthorpe Steel Works
!(
Port Talbot Steel Works
!(
!(
Dunkirk Plant
!(
Hoogovens Steel
!(
Beeckerwerth PlantBruckhausen Plant
!( !(
CSP Plant
!(
!(
!(
!(
!(
!( in Power Sector in India, January 22nd – 23rd, 2008 – Delhi
CCS
!(
Capacity calculations
• Raw calculation of reservoir capacity:
– area * mean thickness * mean porosity * CO2 density @reservoir
conditions
• Use geological model:
– Define reservoir geometry
– Map spatial distribution of properties (K, φ)
– Apply calculation to each mesh/block and integrate spatially
• Capacity of HC fields:
– Vol. OOIP (or gas) * FVF (Formation volume factor) * CO2 density
@reservoir conditions
– Field is considered as depleted
CCS in Power Sector in India, January 22nd – 23rd, 2008 – Delhi
Generic
modelling
exercise
•
•
•
Φmax 32%
Assuming a
reservoir with
variable
properties
Example of cut
off on porosity
Porosity >16%
CCS in Power Sector in India, January 22nd – 23rd, 2008 – Delhi
Towards a more realistic capacity:
applying coefficients
•
Applying cut off on porosity AND permeability focus on the most
promising volume
•
Storage efficiency %
– Used space / available space
– Limitations by depth, traps, permeability, injectivity etc.
•
Sweep efficiency %
– Sweep water to replace it by CO2: depends on K, vol, and boundary
conditions, water and sediment compressibility, CO2 dissolution
– Sweep HC towards production well to replace it by CO2
CCS in Power Sector in India, January 22nd – 23rd, 2008 – Delhi
Capacity estimation - confidence in storage capacity
Capacity (tm) = A.D.φ.hst.ρCO2
• The practical storage capacity estimate decreases with the
number of data and the degree of knowledge.
CCS in Power Sector in India, January 22nd – 23rd, 2008 – Delhi
Second step: site selection
Site selection criteria
Capacity (tm) = A.D.φ.hst.ρCO2
Injectivity (kg/s/b) = Q/ΔP
No use conflict
Depth (>800m, max)
Capacity (min)
Injectivity
Lithology
Onshore/offshore
Trap ?
Seal integrity
Distance/barriers from source
Sites selection
CCS in Power Sector in India, January 22nd – 23rd, 2008 – Delhi
Depth constraint
Critical temperature
31 °C
Critical pressure
73,83 bar
Average temp.
gradient : 25°C / km
Average hydrostatic
pressure gradient :
100 bar / km
Average depth for
CO2 supercritical state
~ 800 m
CCS in Power Sector in India, January 22nd – 23rd, 2008 – Delhi
Injectivity is a limiting factor
Injectivity (kg/s/b) = Q/ΔP
•
Injectivity is the mass of
supercritical CO2 injected
by unit of time for a
defined pressure increase
•
It depends on the
permeability (K) and of the
volume of the reservoir
•
Therefore the injection rate
depends on the maximum
pressure allowed to keep the
reservoir and seal integrity
(e.g. 20 bars) and of the
pressure build up when
injecting
•
Reservoir simulations enable
to estimate these boundary
conditions.
• Lower injectivity values need additional injection wells and cost
CCS in Power Sector in India, January 22nd – 23rd, 2008 – Delhi
Injection and reaction simulation
…after 1000 years …dissolution is the main process
0
SG
1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
-25
-50
Z
-75
Injection
point
-100
-125
Concentration of supercritical
CO2 in the reservoir
-150
-175
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
X
0
XCO2L
0.05
0.045
0.04
0.035
0.03
0.025
0.02
0.015
0.01
0.005
0
-25
-50
Z
-75
-100
-125
Amount of dissolved CO2 in the
water (mass fraction)
Note that brine with dissolved CO2
migrates downward as it is
approximately 10 kg/m3 denser than
brine without CO2.
-150
-175
1000
2000
3000
X
4000
5000
Audigane et al., 2006
CCS in Power Sector in India, January 22nd – 23rd, 2008 – Delhi
Sleipner case: ideal but not usual
•
•
In Sleipner, Statoil injects CO2 since 1996 in a very high porosity,
high permeability extensive sandy aquifer.
It is not obvious to find a ”second Sleipner” near major steel plants
CCS in Power Sector in India, January 22nd – 23rd, 2008 – Delhi
Spatial analyse – Source sink matching
• Select source(s), sink(s)
– superposition of data (main
emitters, capacity of
storage, geology, fault,
urban area, …)
• Calculate the optimal
transport route and distance
between sources and sinks
– Distance & cost
– Build a network of pipeline ?
– Land use : going through
an urban area or a national
park, crossing a big river…
• Obtain a GIS-based
calculation tool with an
economic evaluation
CCS in Power Sector in India, January 22nd – 23rd, 2008 – Delhi
Main steps of a storage project
t0
Site selection
~ t0 + 1 yr
Site
characterisation
~ t0 + 3 yrs
Storage design
& construction
~ t0 + 5 yrs
Injection
operations
~ t0 + 40 yrs
Site closure
Post-closure
~ t0 + 45 yrs
…
Time
Knowledge of the site Confidence in the long-term evolution
CCS in Power Sector in India, January 22nd – 23rd, 2008 – Delhi
Options, concerns and economy
• Options
– Producing CH4 (…and store CO2) > ECBM
– Producing incremental HC (and store ~1MT/y CO2) > EOR, EGR
– Store large amounts / flux of CO2 (~5-10Mt/y) > aquifers
• Concerns
– ECBM > Stacking pattern, petrography and properties of coal
seams, low capacity, needs upstream research & field experiment
– EOR > Constraints of flux and volume related to HC production
– Aquifers > poor geological knowledge compared to HC fields,
injectivity ?
– All > routes
•
Economy
– ECBM and EOR > Direct valorisation of CO2 cost by HC
– Aquifers > Avoiding CO2atm and taxes, needed by high flux plants,
can be combined with HC production (various scenarios)
CCS in Power Sector in India, January 22nd – 23rd, 2008 – Delhi
Some constraints…
Conflicts
of use
permitting
Reservoir
properties
Costs
Seal
properties
Geological
knowledge
Depth
CCS in Power Sector in India, January 22nd – 23rd, 2008 – Delhi
Thank you for your attention !
• Keep in mind this diagram !
CCS in Power Sector in India, January 22nd – 23rd, 2008 – Delhi