2012
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijggc.2011.11.007
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Active CO2 reservoir management for carbon storage: Analysis of operational strategies to relieve pressure buildup and improve injectivity

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
114
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 178 publications
(118 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
1
114
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This means that pressure in the receiving formation increases over a large area, and existing brines are displaced away from the injection site (79). Thus, pressure build-up limits practical storage capacity in many cases (80,81), which has spurred development of pressure management concepts generally (82), and brine withdrawal plans at the Australian Gorgon sequestration project specifically (83). Regulations also recognize the novel aspects of sequestration, typically requiring thorough understanding of site-specific risks (84), which has driven much research into the potential impacts of CO 2 sequestration and risk assessment (85,86).…”
Section: Fossil-ccsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This means that pressure in the receiving formation increases over a large area, and existing brines are displaced away from the injection site (79). Thus, pressure build-up limits practical storage capacity in many cases (80,81), which has spurred development of pressure management concepts generally (82), and brine withdrawal plans at the Australian Gorgon sequestration project specifically (83). Regulations also recognize the novel aspects of sequestration, typically requiring thorough understanding of site-specific risks (84), which has driven much research into the potential impacts of CO 2 sequestration and risk assessment (85,86).…”
Section: Fossil-ccsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Additional assumptions made by this model include: 1) Aquifers exhibit horizontal flow; 2) Capillary pressure is negligible resulting in a sharp fluid interface; 3) CO 2 plume thickness at any given location is assumed to be the maximum plume thickness from all sources in the aquifer; 4) Pressure response from sources and sinks are superimposed in each aquifer; and 5) the injectivity of the formation remains constant. Several of these processes are important [9,11,13,15,17,22,26] and should be included [6,16,23,39] when model accuracy is more important that efficiency (e.g. during final project design).…”
Section: The Estimating Leakage Semi-analytically (Elsa) Algorithmmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Previous studies and applications show that CO 2 injectivity can be affected by the following mechanisms: (1) pressure build-up due to massive and continuous CO 2 injection; (2) dry-out of the near-well zone due to evaporation of H 2 O into unsaturated CO 2 ; (3) CO 2 -water-rock interactions induced by the injection of CO 2 (Bacci et al 2011) [11][12][13]. Among these processes, CO 2 -water-rock interactions could alter the rock matrix and potentially lead to porosity and permeability changes in the near-well zone [14][15][16][17], which is of particular importance for CO 2 injectivity.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%