Secure Geologic Carbon Storage

BRUCE HILL, PH.D. SENIOR GEOLOGIST RECS, BIRMINGHAM ALABAMA, JUNE 2013

Is Geologic Storage Safe?

Deadly gas releases?

Earthquakes?

Frac damage of shale seal?

http://esd.lbl.gov/IMG/research/projects/induced_seismicity/ injection_related_seismicity.jpg

Leakage to water sources?

RECS 2 http://www.tulane.edu/~sanelson/images/lakenyos.gif

Risk: A Reality Check.

Catastrophic CO2 leakage Pressure build up-- limitations to commercial storage volumes? Induced seismicitypotential for damaging earthquakes? Overlap risk with unconventional shale development? Groundwater and Atmospheric Leakage EOR vs Saline Storage Questions/ Discussion
RECS 3

Catastrophic Leakage

RECS 4

Lake Nyos, Tragedy Cameroon

Active volcanic area; 682 lake, a few hundred years old. CO2 from magma leaked progressively into lake bottom thermocline and supersaturated the cold water. Aug 21, 1986, rockslide disturbed supersaturated CO2 at lake bottom. Deadly cloud of CO2 Aug 21-23 spread, killing as far as 25 km. 1746 lives lost. People unconscious for 36 hrs Lake level lowered, lake changed from blue to rust color 1/3 cubic mile of CO2 ejected Prior to Nyos, Aug 15 1984, Lake Monoun, 37 Dead

http://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/earth/geophysics/lake-nyos.htm/printable

RECS 5

What Makes a Killer Lake?

Magma 5-10 km below volcanic areas release CO2. Pressure forces it to surface. Stable climatelakes in tropics. No seasonal turnover like in temperate lakes, so thermocline remains. CO2 more soluble in water at lower T, Deep lake. 20 Atm pressure. Wind cannot mix like in a shallow lake. Lake becomes supersaturated. Disturbance such as a landslide, seismicity triggers.
RECS 6

Why Catastrophic Release of CO2 is extremely unlikely from GS

CO2 is injected into a deep (>2,500 ft) semi porous rock formation that restricts permeability and flow. Lakes above GS facilities very unlikely to have meteorological conditions or depth of a Lake Nyos. GS is undertaken in a porous sandstone or carbonate with overlying impermeable caprock. Capillary trapping of CO2 in rock. 150-200MA Jackson Dome: underground geologic structure with 0.5 Gt CO2. Regardless, monitoring should be risk based. In a GS field, at the first sign of unexpected CO2 migration, a warning could be relayed to control facility & shut down.
RECS 7

Old Faithful. Yellowstone NP Diffuse Degassing, 16 Mt/a

Happy Onlookers

RECS 8

Geologic Storage Pore Volumes and Induced Seismicity

RECS 9

Economides (2009, 2010): Commercial Scale Geologic Storage Infeasible?

2009* and 2010** papers by petroleum engineers from the University of Houston and Texas A&M University called into question widely held assumptions about the underground storage capacity for CO2 our finding is that CO2 can occupy no more than 1% of the pore volume and likely as much as 100 times less. renders geologic sequestration of CO2 a profoundly non-feasible option for the management of CO2 emissions.
*M.J. Economides, and C.A. Ehlig-Economides, Sequestering Carbon Dioxide in an Closed Underground Volume. SPE 124430, 2009 **Ehlig-Economides, C.A. & Economides, M.J. 2010. Sequestering carbon dioxide in a closed underground volume, Journal of RECS 10 Petroleum Science and Engineering, 70, 123-130.

Closed System: Valid Assumption?

Assumption: A storage volume must be geologically closed on all sides, bound by permeability barriers, and nearly saturated by formation fluids.
A geologically unrealistic assumption used by reservoir engineers for small fields. A storage volume must be overlain by an impermeable cap, but does not need to be closed laterally or below to be secure. The subsequent assumption was that the only way to fill the available pore volume with CO2 is to increase injection pressure in the formation until it approaches the fracture pressure limit.
RECS 11

Closed vs. Open System

LBNL: Studies of Pressure Buildup and Brine Displacement in Idealized Subsurface Systems (2012)

Pressure management via brine production Most geologic systems are not closed Some have small-but non-zero permeability.
RECS 12

Field Experience at Odds with Economides Result.

Current CO2 injection operations demonstrate that the actual capacity is much larger than the authors theoretical arguments would suggest. The subsurface model does not represent formations being used for storage, e.g. Sleipner, In Salah. Statoil Hydro has been storing 1 Mt per year for a decade and a half at their Sleipner field in the North Sea. NETL Carbon Sequestration Atlas: at 1% storage efficiency N.A. storage potential is 3.3 trillion Mt.
RECS 13

LBNL (2012) Findings:

Closed systems with impermeable seals allow CO2 storage only up to the point at which pressure in the storage formation approaches a sustainable threshold. In contrast, with small but non-zero seal permeability, brine leakage into and through the seals had a moderate to strong effect in reducing or limiting the pressure buildup in the storage formation, thus allowing for considerably higher storage efficiency, while CO2 was still safely trapped because of the combined capillary and permeability barriers.
Source: http://esd.lbl.gov/research/programs/gcs/projects/storage_resources/ RECS 14 co2storage.html

Injection is Widespread in Large Volumes: 3.4 Gt/a

Wilson et al (2003) ES&T

RECS 15

Wilson et al (2003) ES&T

RECS 16

Will Commerical Injections Critically Stress Crust?

Seuss via Hovorka

Will Injection into Limited Pore Volumes Cause Induced Seismicity?

RECS 17

Fluid Injection and Earthquake Triggering

Re-thinking Large Scale Carbon Capture and Storage

Mark D. Zoback Professor of Geophysics

The image cannot be displayed. Your computer may not have enough memory to open the image, or the image may have been corrupted. Restart your computer, and then open the le again. If the red x still appears, you may have to delete the image and then insert it again.

The image cannot be displayed. Your computer may not have enough memory to open the image, or the image may have been corrupted. Restart your computer, and then open the le again. If the red x still appears, you may have to delete the image and then insert it again.

Injection Triggered Seismicity

Prague, OK 3 M5+ Eqs Nov., 2011

Prague, OK* Nov. 2011 M 5.7

Earthquakes Occur Nearly Everywhere in Intraplate Areas Small Perturbations Capable of Triggering Seismicity, Even in Stable Areas

After M Zoback

RECS 19

Waste Injection Denver Arsenal

Fluid Injection Rangely Oil Field

Courtesy M Zoback

RECS 20

In TX study, higher volume brine disposal wells were proximal to epicenters

RECS 21

Zoback & Gorelick PNAS Perspective

There is a high probability that earthquakes will be triggered by injection of large volumes of CO2 into the brittle rocks commonly found in continental interiors. Because even small- to moderate-sized earthquakes threaten the seal integrity of CO2 repositories, . . . largescale CCS is a risky, and likely unsuccessful, strategy for significantly reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

www.pnas.org/cgi/doi/10.1073/pnas.1202473109 RECS 22

Its the capacitynot the seismicity

the issue is not whether CO2 can be safely stored at a given site; the issue is whether the capacity exists for sufficient volumes of CO2 to be stored geologically for it to have the desired beneficial effect on climate change. In this context, it must be recognized that large-scale CCS will be an extremely expensive and risky strategy for achieving significant reductions in greenhouse gas emissions.

RECS 23

NAS Study: Induced Seismicity In the Energy Industry (Hitzman et al 2012)

RECS 24

NAS (2012)

RECS 25

Does Seismic Hazard Risk Align with Storage Resources?

USGS Earthquake hazard map.

Courtesy, S. Hovorka, TX BEG

RECS 26

Ground Truth Counter Example

California is riddled with faults & hydrocarbons
1952 M=7.3 1857 M=7.9

www.earthquakecountry.info/roots/inline/11839sm.jpg www.sjvgeology.org/history/lakeview/lakeview06.jpg

Hydrocarbon reservoirs survive millions of years of earthquakes without losing over-pressure (e.g., Lakeview Gusher, 1910, Taft, CA)
Courtesy B. Hager, MIT
RECS 27

Almost no quakes in LA < 2 km depth

W. Yang &E. Hauksson, BSSA, 101, 964-974, 2011

RECS 28

Earthquakes are in Geologic Basement Rocks. Example 1987 Whittier Narrows Shaw & Shearer, Science, 1999 earthquake, LA

Brittle faulting at depth Ductile folding near surface

Courtesy B. Hager, MIT

Shales? Pressure solution?

RECS 29

Feared Induced Seismicity in Current Storage fields

Aneth field, Utah InSalah, Algeria Snovit, Barents Sea, Norway: pressure increase greater than expected Cranfield (near well during high injection rates) Illinois Basin

Rutledge and Soma 2010 cited by Fagan2012

Rutqvist, 2012 Courtesy, S Hovorka, TX BEG

Rutqvist, 2012

RECS 30

Does Competing Use Reduce Available Storage? Risk of Fracing of Storage Caprock During Unconventional Shale Development.

RECS 31

On Overlap with Shale Development

Elliot and Celia (ES&T, 2012). 2D (map view) analysis of overlap between shale development areas and saline aquifers associated with 1Mt/y or greater sources. Found 60% of the saline aquifer areas overlap. But removed storage capacity associated with the overlap areas reduce sequestration capacity by between 217 Gt CO2 and 2,885 GT CO2 a reduction of close to 80%.

RECS 32

Elliot and Celia 2D analysis of shale-GS overlap

RECS 33

Elliot and Celia (2012)

RECS 34

Elliot and Celia Conclusions

If we assume all of the vertical sequence is eliminated whenever shale gas production takes place anywhere in the sequence, then the estimated storage capacity for CO2 in deep saline aquifers is reduced by about 80%. These results, while based only on areal analysis, show how important the conflict between enhanced and unconventional gas production and geological sequestration of CO2 might be.

RECS 35

Critique of Elliot and Celia

Mapping of NATCATB data, a simple 2D representation of potential overlap in shale and geologic sequestration (GS) resources. 3D analysis critical to a robust assessment of the overlap of these resources. While they acknowledge the simplicity of their GIS analysis, is publication of the consequences alarmist? In reality geology is complex, multiple sequences inherent to sedimentary sequences. Thus the analysis does not provide useful information.
RECS 36

Vertical Separation and Multiple Seals Provides Storage Security.

RECS 37

What Learn from Elliot & Celia:

Maintaining vertical separation between unconventional shale operations (current or preexisting) and GS resources will ensure independent seal above storage formation. Importance of comprehensive geologic characterization and risk analysis in advance of sequestration or shale gas operation. Regulators must carefully manage areas with existing or a history of multiple resource use.

RECS 38

Managing Leakage Risk to Groundwater and Air

RECS 39

Leakage Pathways

Source LBNL: http://esd.lbl.gov/research/programs/gcs/projects/storage_resources/co2storage.html

RECS 40

UIC Program Well Classes II, VI

Geologic Storage

Oil and Gas

151,000 EOR wells(80%) Brine Disposal Wells (20%)

Class II Administered by most States Via Primacy

States may also Administer class VI by primacy but presently done By EPA regions. RECS 41

Rough Comparison of UIC Class II & Class VI Requirements

RECS 42

Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule Subparts RR & UU Published in 2010.

Part of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program (GHGRP)

Subparts RR and UU, FR V. 75 No. 230, December 1, 2010 at 75065

http://www.epa.gov/ghgreporting/reporters/subpart/rr.html
RECS 43

Schematic (EPA, 2013)

Subpart PPCO2 Supply
The image cannot be displayed. Your computer may not have enough memory to open the image, or the image may have been corrupted. Restart your computer, and then open the le again. If the red x still appears, you may have to delete the image and then insert it again.

Subpart UUCO2 Received

CO2 received
Facility Fence line

Subpart RRCO2 Sequestered

CO2 injected
EL& V

CO2 produced
The image cannot be displayed. Your computer may not have enough memory to open the image, or the image may have been corrupted. Restart your computer, and

EL& V

CO2 entrained in fluids

CO2 source

CO2 surface leakage, if any

Key M = Meter EL&V = Equipment Leaks and Vented Emissions

Geologic Formation

RECS 44

Reporting Rules are for Reporting

Authority comes from the U.S. Clean Air Act. Complementary to EPAs Underground Injection Control (UIC) rules to protect water under the U.S. Safe Drinking Water Act. Not a comprehensive sequestration/storage rule. Provides accounting methodology for storage. Collects CO2 mass balance data from facilities injecting CO2 to track CO2 supply and movement with other GHGRP data. Purpose is to document permanence of stored CO2 through monitoring, reporting, verification.
RECS 45

Subpart RR (all storage facilities)

Facilities must:
Report basic information on CO2 received for injection. Develop and implement an EPA-approved sitespecific MRV (Monitoring, Reporting, Verification) plan. Report the amount of CO2 geologically sequestered (stored) using a mass balance approach and annual monitoring activities.

RECS 46

MRV Plan Must Include:

1. Identify active and maximum monitoring areas. 2. Identify surface leakage pathways (EOR focus should be abandoned wells). 3. Develop strategy for detection and quantification of surface CO2 leakage. 4. Baseline measurements (pre-injection). 5. Calculation methodologies and accounting. 6. Continue post injection monitoring until EPA grants site closure authorization. Monitoring and modeling must show CO2 is not expected to migrate in the future in an manner that would result in surface leakage.

RECS 47

Current GS Projects with R&D Exemptions from Subpart RR. No RR Reporting Facilities to Date.

RECS 48

Facilities Reporting under UU Mostly EOR

Subpart UU: Appx 75 facilities, mostly EOR, have reported 64 Mt received for injection.

RECS 49 Source: http://ghgdata.epa.gov/ghgp/main.do#/facility/?q=Find%20a%20Facility%20or%20Location&st=&fid=&sf=11001000&ds=I&yr=2011&tr=current&cyr=2011

Integrating RR & UIC Requirements

Storage in EOR fields can be done under UIC Class II or Class VI depending on risk to USDWs. UIC program elements (particularly class VI) may satisfy most MRV plan requirements for subpart RR. RR adds the accounting element to Class VI. Class II alone is not enough to provide assurance of security of stored volumes; RR is a particularly critical element of Class II storage as it requires AoR, monitoring, accounting and a demonstration CO2 will not leak to the atmosphere post-closure. . EPA requires a transition to class VI from class II in EOR fields where there is an increased risk to USDWs. Must revise MRV plan. Proposed guidance document on transition soon. RECS 50

Storage Regulations Gap?

Though the provide many of their technical elements to support GHG reductions through storage, neither Class VI nor GHGRP were designed with full goal to reduce GHGs. Underground Injection Control (UIC) rules despite the CO2 focus are for aquifer protection. Class II promulgated in 1980 for O&G without GHG focus. Subpart RR does not enforce emissions reductions nor does it penalize facilities for releases to the atmosphere. While Subpart RR and UIC program rules are complementary, no rules exists in the U.S. that would certify a volume of CO2 for storage.
RECS 51

MVA Progress. A few examples

RECS 52

Commercial Scale Injection 4 Gt in Denbury Cranfield Field, Natchez MS.

$34M MVA study Micro seismic studies **AZMI** (Above Zone Monitoring Interval) Crosswell methods Soil, groundwater methods TX BEG, SECARB, LLNL, LBNL, DOE, Schl.

RECS 53

Summit TCEP/Whiting North Ward Estes Field Project. 2.5 Mt/a

TX BEG developing MVA Plan to Meet TX Requirements Source: Odessa TX 450 MW Polygen Plant with 90% Capture.
http://www.texascleanenergyproject.com/ category/press-releases/
RECS 54

Denbury West Hastings Oyster Bayou Field, Houston.

1 Mt/a CO2 from Green Pipeline from Steam Methane Reformers Air Products refinery, Port Arthur TX. TX BEG Responsible for MVA

RECS 55

Citronelle : Advanced MVA Technology: CCP Modular Borehole Monitoring

Cintronelle / Plant Barry project. CCP, LBNL, EPRI Southern Co, SECARB Rugged modular multi sensor system for small diameter/deep wells. Semi-permanent flat sensor string including fiber optic cable & sample tubing. Plume tracking with geophone array; crosswell, offset VSP, walk-away VSP. Reservoir P & T sensors Heat-pulse monitoring =/- 0.1 deg C sensitivity leak detection / flow monitoring Fluid sampling via U-tube.

RECS 56

Illinois Decatur Project Schlumberger Westbay System

P. T probes in a 3 dimensional network. Measures vertical distributions of fluid pressure. Obtains fluid samples. Generate stress in monitoring zone and measure response in adjacent wells and zones.

RECS 57

Process-Based Soil Gas Method: Weyburn Leakage K. Romanak, U TX (2013)

Does not rely on background CO2 measurements. Uses ratios among simple gases (CO2, CH4, N2, O2)

RECS 58

Comparative Risk: Saline & EOR-Storage

RECS 59

RECS 60

EOR-Storage:
+ Known trap, stored hydrocarbons for millions of years. + Known injectivity, vertical profile conformance, CO2 solubility. + Pressure management; avoidance of seismicity. + Existing reservoir model and data. + CO2 transportation infrastructure. + CO2 injection infrastructure. + Inherent CO2 plume management (via production). + Efficiency of pore space contact through recycling. + Undertaken in brownfield. + Conducted in regions accustomed to injection (public acceptance). - Abandoned / orphaned wells provide greatest risk. - Unknown field history; caprock integrity following decades of production. - Secondary target may needed to ensure reliability of system. - Existing injector/production well construction/integrity. - Lease boundary risk
RECS 61

EOR-Storage: Starting Point or Major CO2 Storage Resource?

.

(Advanced Resources Inc)

Next Generation EOR & Residual Oil Zones Will Require An Estimated 30 gT Captured CO2

RECS 62

62

Residual Oil Zones Schematic: San Andres Type 3

ROZ produced with same methods as CO2 EOR.

RECS 63

Legado resources: ROZ development in W Texas

RECS 64

Managing Risk in EOR Settings

After Hill, Hovorka, Melzer (2012); Original chart: Sue Hovorka.

RECS 65

Saline and EOR at One Facility? Stacked Storage

Existing Infrastructure Reservoir knowledge and capacity Existing Surveillance tools Multiple caprock seals

RECS 66

Stacked Reservoirs, Frio Project, TX

Courtesy Sue Hovorka / after Bill Ambrose, TX BEG/Gulf Coast Carbon Center

RECS 67

Questions to Stimulate Discussion

RECS 68

Discussion I: Risk
Where are the most important areas of risk for regulators to manage in EOR an saline storage? How should proponents of CCS/CCUS proactively educate the public and policymakers about risk? How can we make regulations more risk and uncertainty based such that they are more effective?

RECS 69

Discussion II: Commercial Scale Storage Management

How could commercial scale storage be managed without conflicting uses, such as HF (what are some others?), or risks such as induced seismicity? What are the options for commercial scale storage volumes?
Stacked storage Comprehensive pipeline build out Multiple resource access Carbon storage hub or utility

What should DOEs priorities be in paving the way for commercial volumes? How much of the U.S. could be served by EOR storage and how would that be accomplished?
RECS 70

THANKS!
Bruce Hill Clean Air Task Force (603) 383 6400 bruce@catf.us

RECS 71