2017
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijggc.2017.06.012
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Development of robust pressure management strategies for geologic CO2 sequestration

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
5

Citation Types

0
26
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7

Relationship

2
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 29 publications
(26 citation statements)
references
References 45 publications
0
26
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Researchers in various disciplines are working on ways to mitigate the atmospheric carbon problem. One of the options currently discussed is the capture of CO 2 from large point sources such as fossil‐fueled power plants and subsequent storage of captured CO 2 in geological formations . Carbon capture, utilization and storage (CCUS) is considered one of a suite of technology alternatives recognized by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and other organizations as a technically viable approach to reduce anthropogenic CO 2 emissions .…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Researchers in various disciplines are working on ways to mitigate the atmospheric carbon problem. One of the options currently discussed is the capture of CO 2 from large point sources such as fossil‐fueled power plants and subsequent storage of captured CO 2 in geological formations . Carbon capture, utilization and storage (CCUS) is considered one of a suite of technology alternatives recognized by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and other organizations as a technically viable approach to reduce anthropogenic CO 2 emissions .…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…One of the options currently discussed is the capture of CO 2 from large point sources such as fossil-fueled power plants and subsequent storage of captured CO 2 in geological formations. [4][5][6] Carbon capture, utilization and storage (CCUS) is considered one of a suite of technology alternatives recognized by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and other organizations as a technically viable approach to reduce anthropogenic CO 2 emissions. [7][8][9] International Energy Agency (IEA) projections indicate that a least-cost pathway to achieve a 2°C scenario (limiting average global warming to well below 2°C above preindustrial times) would require the capture and storage of almost 4000 million tonnes of CO 2 per annum in 2040.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, it can be achieved if CCS is added as a routine technology to any process that uses fossil fuels. Thus far, geological reservoirs, such as depleted oil or gas fields, or deep saline aquifers, have been considered as appropriate geologic formations for storing CO 2 emissions at a depth of several thousand meters [1][2][3]. Saline aquifers provide large storage capacities, are broadly distributed geographically, and are more accessible to capture sites as they facilitate the entire CO 2 transport process [4].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Fully utilizing the information produced with a monitoring program requires a formal approach to integrate monitoring data into models in a manner that provides indications of the risks associated with the GCS operation. While there are many existing GCS related publications describing and demonstrating alternative monitoring techniques (Cheng et al, 2010;Dafflon et al, 2012;Doetsch et al, 2013;Lin and Huang, 2015), uncertainty quantification approaches (Sun et al, 2013;Trainor-Guitton et al, 2013;Harp et al, 2017), and data assimilation approaches (Kumar, 2010;Chen et al, 2018), there are few examples describing how to incorporate monitoring data as it becomes available during a GCS operation to support designations of conformance. Bielicki et al (2016) present an approach to quantify the monetized leakage risk of GCS operations, including the impact of remediating leaks, but the approach is intended to evaluate 2 potential sites, not assimilate monitoring data during a GCS operation.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In this paper, we discuss how data and modeling can be coupled to support robust designations of conformance in GCS operations. The approach uses a similar decision analysis as in Harp et al (2017), which proposed an approach to select a GCS pressure management strategy, but in this case applies and extends the decision analysis to designations of conformance over the course of the GCS operation.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%