3D Pressure‐limited approach to model and estimate CO₂ injection and storage capacity: saline Mount Simon Formation

Abstract

To estimate the carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) injection and storage capacity of saline formations, we used Tough2-ECO2N simulation software to develop a pressure-limited (dynamic) simulation approach based on applying three-dimensional (3D) numerical simulation only on the effective injection area (A eff ) surrounding each injection well. A statistical analysis was performed to account for existing reservoir heterogeneity and property variations. The accuracy of the model simulation results (such as CO 2 plume extension and induced injection well bottomhole pressure values) were tested and verified against the data obtained from the Decatur CO 2 injection study of the Mount Simon Formation. Next, we designed a full-field CO 2 injection pattern by populating the core sections of this formation with a series of the simulated effective injection areas such that each simulated A eff acts as a closed domain. The results of this analysis were used to estimate the optimum number and location of the required CO 2 injection wells, along with the dynamic annual CO 2 injection rate and overall pressure-limited storage capacity of this formation. This approach enabled us to model separate CO 2 injection activities independently at different sections of the same saline formation and to model and simulate faults and natural barriers by considering them as boundary conditions for each simulated A eff without constructing full-field models. Using this approach, a series of modeled A eff with relevant properties may be redesigned to model any other saline formation with a similar structure. C

A study on the impact of storage boundary and caprock morphology on carbon sequestration in saline aquifers

“…Model heterogeneity was taken into account using a statistical analysis approach. The results for the plume extension and pressure data showed a good match with the data from the Decatur CO 2 injection study of the Mount Simon Formation 43 . Early comparison of full 3D simulations and VE calculations on a real model was undertaken on the Utsira formation 106 .…”

“…A good storage candidate will have a secure and very low permeable caprock (extremely tight formation), a large pore volume, good permeability and good pressure connectivity over long distances so the injection will not result in a significant pressure build‐up 38 . Moreover, several parameters, including the presence and size of structural traps, 25,39 the planned amount of injected CO 2 40,41 , likely migration paths, 39 migration speed 42 and the pressure build‐up, 43,44 must be taken into account while characterising a potential storage reservoir 27 . Based on the structural characteristics of the site, the lateral and vertical migration of the CO 2 can be predicted.…”

“…The results for the plume extension and pressure data showed a good match with the data from the Decatur CO 2 injection study of the Mount Simon Formation. 43 Early comparison of full 3D simulations and VE calculations on a real model was undertaken on the Utsira formation. 106 In that work, a simplified model that did not include capillary pressure and dissolution was considered.…”

Total cost of carbon capture and storage implemented at a regional scale: northeastern and midwestern United States

“…Modelling studies have indicated that approximations of the effective space available to store supercritical CO 2 within the pore space of the geological formations may be additionally constrained from an applied perspective by the increases in pressure caused by injection of the CO 2 [16,18,19] . Ultimately, the rate of injection must be low enough for pressure to dissipate and remain at a level below the fracture threshold of the caprock.…”

“…First, we apply the model to the data using the defined storage capacities [14,15] as the only limitation on CO 2 storage location. Next, we apply the model while filtering the suitable storage locations using a minimum distance between injection sites and a cap on injection rates at individual injection sites; our objective is to assess cost with storage resources limited by the potential effects of local and far-field increases in formation pressures related to large-scale injections of CO 2 emissions across the region [16][17][18][19][20]. Finally, we apply the model to test how much it would cost to store emissions exclusively in offshore saline reservoirs.…”