Geomechanical aspects of CO2 sequestration in a deep saline reservoir in the Ohio River Valley region

The Geomechanics of CO2 Storage in Deep Sedimentary Formations

“…Streit and Hillis 2004;Soltanzadeh and Hawkes 2009;Selvadurai 2009;Mathias et al 2010;Rohmer and Olivier 2010) or numerical multiphase flow models linked with analytical geomechanical models (e.g. Lucier et al 2006;Chiaramonte et al 2008;Vidal-Gilbert et al 2010) can also be useful for first-order analysis and quick assessment of CO 2 injection-site suitability.…”

“…In the case of acid gas injections in western Canada, the operating license limits the maximum bottom-hole pressure to no higher than 90% of the fracturing pressure, to ensure that fracturing of the caprock does not occur, but in many cases actual bottom-hole pressure is much lower when injection takes place in depleted oil or gas reservoirs (IAE 2003). However, in the case of potential future commercial CO 2 injections from an emitting power plant, the injection will take place at a much larger scale, and therefore other issues, such as potential for fault reactivation and the long-term sealing performance, may be limiting factors for the admissible overpressure (Streit and Hillis 2004;Hawkes et al 2005;Lucier et al 2006;Li et al 2006;Rutqvist et al 2007Rutqvist et al , 2008. Lucier et al (2006) performed one of the first site-specific geomechanics and injectivity studies, related to carbon capture and storage at the American Electric Power's (AEP) 1.3-GW Mountaineer Power Plant in New Haven, West Virginia.…”

“…However, in the case of potential future commercial CO 2 injections from an emitting power plant, the injection will take place at a much larger scale, and therefore other issues, such as potential for fault reactivation and the long-term sealing performance, may be limiting factors for the admissible overpressure (Streit and Hillis 2004;Hawkes et al 2005;Lucier et al 2006;Li et al 2006;Rutqvist et al 2007Rutqvist et al , 2008. Lucier et al (2006) performed one of the first site-specific geomechanics and injectivity studies, related to carbon capture and storage at the American Electric Power's (AEP) 1.3-GW Mountaineer Power Plant in New Haven, West Virginia. Lucier et al (2006) completed a coupled fluid flow and geomechanical analysis of the Rose Run Sandstone, a potential injection zone located at a depth of about 2,500 m. They found that injectivity would be quite limited as a result of limited thickness and low to moderate permeability.…”

“…Lucier et al (2006) performed one of the first site-specific geomechanics and injectivity studies, related to carbon capture and storage at the American Electric Power's (AEP) 1.3-GW Mountaineer Power Plant in New Haven, West Virginia. Lucier et al (2006) completed a coupled fluid flow and geomechanical analysis of the Rose Run Sandstone, a potential injection zone located at a depth of about 2,500 m. They found that injectivity would be quite limited as a result of limited thickness and low to moderate permeability. They estimated that for a single injection well, the formation could take only a small fraction of the Mountaineer emissions (7 Mt/ year), even when applying a relatively high injection pressure (limited to a magnitude just below the fracturing gradient).…”

“…They estimated that for a single injection well, the formation could take only a small fraction of the Mountaineer emissions (7 Mt/ year), even when applying a relatively high injection pressure (limited to a magnitude just below the fracturing gradient). Moreover, the analysis indicated that induced seismicity in the caprock could occur with a slight increase in pressure if optimally oriented faults would be present (Lucier et al 2006). However, the site is overlain by multiple lowpermeability layers of shales and permeable strata.…”