Lessons Learned from Natural and Industrial Analogues for Storage of Carbon Dioxide in Deep Geological Formations

Benson, Sally M.; Hepple, Robert P.; Apps, John A.; Tsang, Chin‐Fu; Lippmann, Marcelo J.

doi:10.2172/805134

Cited by 75 publications

(55 citation statements)

References 178 publications

(256 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Our estimates are almost certainly not an upper bound on storage costs. As previously stated, site configuration, monitoring, and long-term liability practices have not yet been established (Benson et al, 2002;Hepple and Benson, 2005), and we do not include other potentially significant expenses such as compensating property owners (Gresham et al, 2010). Other factors beyond the scope of this study can also affect costs, such as obtaining legal rights to the pore space needed for storage, estimates for which range between $0.4 and $11/tCO 2 (Duncan et al, 2009;Gresham et al, 2010).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…While this new version of our cost module now allows for a more comprehensive estimation of storage costs, we recognize that though regulations for sequestration have been developed in the United States (Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), 2010), site configuration, monitoring, and long-term liability practices for CO 2 storage have not yet been established (Benson et al, 2002;Hepple and Benson, 2005). This implies that many of the expenses compiled by the EPA are tentative.…”

Section: Cost Modulementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The impact of geologic variability on capacity and cost estimates for storing CO2 in deep-saline aquifers

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While numerous studies find that deep-saline sandstone aquifers in the United States could store many decades worth of the nation's current annual CO 2 emissions, the likely cost of this storage (i.e. the cost of storage only and not capture and transport costs) has been harder to constrain. We use publicly available data of key reservoir properties to produce geo-referenced rasters of estimated storage capacity and cost for regions within 15 deep-saline sandstone aquifers in the United States. The rasters reveal the reservoir quality of these aquifers to be so variable that the cost estimates for storage span three orders of magnitude and average > $100/tonne CO 2 . However, when the cost and corresponding capacity estimates in the rasters are assembled into a marginal abatement cost curve (MACC), we find that~75% of the estimated storage capacity could be available for b $2/tonne. Furthermore,~80% of the total estimated storage capacity in the rasters is concentrated within just two of the aquifers-the Frio Formation along the Texas Gulf Coast, and the Mt. Simon Formation in the Michigan Basin, which together make up only~20% of the areas analyzed. While our assessment is not comprehensive, the results suggest there should be an abundance of low-cost storage for CO 2 in deep-saline aquifers, but a majority of this storage is likely to be concentrated within specific regions of a smaller number of these aquifers.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Cost Modulementioning

confidence: 99%

The impact of geologic variability on capacity and cost estimates for storing CO2 in deep-saline aquifers

et al. 2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The existing framework for deep underground injection in the USA is covered by the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) Underground Injection Control (UIC) program, designed to protect underground sources of drinking water (i.e., potable water, defined as water with less than 10,000 mg/L total dissolved solids) (e.g., USEPA 2001; Benson et al 2002). This program is currently being extended in the USA to cover deep injection of CO 2 through the addition of Class VI injection well (a CO 2 injection well) to augment the existing Class I-V wells.…”

Section: Challenges Associated With Gcsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative Assessment of Status and Opportunities for Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage and Radioactive Waste Disposal in North America

Oldenburg

Birkhölzer

2011

Advances in Global Change Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aside from the target storage regions being underground, geologic carbon sequestration (GCS) and radioactive waste disposal (RWD) share little in common in North America. The large volume of carbon dioxide (CO 2 ) needed to be sequestered along with its relatively benign health effects present a sharp contrast to the limited volumes and hazardous nature of high-level radioactive waste (RW). There is well-documented capacity in North America for 100 years or more of sequestration of CO 2 from coal-fired power plants. Aside from economics, the challenges of GCS include lack of fully established legal and regulatory framework for ownership of injected CO 2 , the need for an expanded pipeline infrastructure, and public acceptance of the technology. As for RW, the USA had proposed the unsaturated tuffs of Yucca Mountain, Nevada, as the region's first high-level RWD site before removing it from consideration in early 2009. The Canadian RW program is currently evolving with options that range from geologic disposal to both decentralized and centralized permanent storage in surface facilities. Both the USA and Canada have established legal and regulatory frameworks for RWD. The most challenging technical issue for RWD is the need to predict repository performance on extremely long time scales (10 4 -10 6 years). While attitudes toward nuclear power are rapidly changing as fossil-fuel costs soar and changes in climate occur, public perception remains the most serious challenge to opening RW repositories. Because of the many significant differences between RWD and GCS, there is little that can be shared between them from regulatory, legal, transportation, or economic perspectives. As for public perception, there is currently an opportunity to engage the public on the benefits and risks of both GCS and RWD as they learn more about the urgent energy-climate crisis created by greenhouse gas emissions from current fossil-fuel combustion practices.3

show abstract

“…Although limited CO 2 leakage does not negate the net reduction of CO 2 emissions to the atmosphere, adverse health, safety, and environmental risks associated with elevated CO 2 concentrations must be evaluated, particularly if the release at the surface occurs quickly and/or is spatially focused. Large-magnitude releases of gas (e.g., CO 2 , natural gas) from depth to the near-surface environment that have occurred in natural and industrial settings can serve as analogues for the potential release of CO 2 from geologic storage sites [e.g., Allis et al, 2001;Stevens et al, 2001a;Stevens et al, 2001b;Benson et al, 2002;Beaubien et al, 2004;Shipton et al, 2004;NASCENT, 2005]. Analysis of these analogues thus provides important insight into the key characteristics of the CO 2 release, the resulting impacts of the release on human health and safety, ecology, and groundwater the effectiveness of remedial measures applied.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Natural and industrial analogues for release of CO2 from storagereservoirs: Identification of features, events, and processes and lessonslearned

Lewicki¹,

Birkhölzer²,

Tsang³

2006

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

. We thank J. Apps and A. Cortis for constructive review of this report. 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARYThe injection and storage of anthropogenic CO 2 in deep geologic formations is a potentially feasible strategy to reduce CO 2 emissions and atmospheric concentrations. While the purpose of geologic carbon storage is to trap CO 2 underground, CO 2 could migrate away from the storage site into the shallow subsurface and atmosphere if permeable pathways such as well bores or faults are present. Large-magnitude releases of CO 2 have occurred naturally from geologic reservoirs in numerous volcanic, geothermal, and sedimentary basin settings. Carbon dioxide and natural gas have also been released from geologic CO 2 reservoirs and natural gas storage facilities, respectively, due to influences such as well defects and injection/withdrawal processes. These systems serve as natural and industrial analogues for the potential release of CO 2 from geologic storage reservoirs and provide important information about the key features, events, and processes (FEPs) that are associated with releases, as well as the health, safety, and environmental consequences of releases and mitigation efforts that can be applied.We describe a range of natural releases of CO 2 and industrial releases of CO 2 and natural gas in the context of these characteristics. Based on this analysis, several key conclusions can be drawn, and lessons can be learned for geologic carbon storage. First, CO 2 can both accumulate beneath, and be released from, primary and secondary reservoirs with capping units located at a wide range of depths. Both primary and secondary reservoir entrapments for CO 2 should therefore be well characterized at storage sites. Second, many natural releases of CO 2 have been correlated with a specific event that triggered the release, such as magmatic fluid intrusion or seismic activity. The potential for processes that could cause geomechanical damage to sealing cap rocks and trigger the release of CO 2 from a storage reservoir should be evaluated. Third, unsealed fault and fracture zones may act as fast and direct conduits for CO 2 flow from depth to the surface. Risk assessment should therefore emphasize determining the potential for and nature of CO 2 migration along these structures. Fourth, wells that are structurally unsound have the potential to rapidly release large quantities of CO 2 to the atmosphere. Risk assessment should therefore be focused on the potential for both active and abandoned wells at storage sites to transport CO 2 to the surface, particularly at sites with depleted oil or gas reservoirs where wells are abundant. Fifth, the style of CO 2 release at the surface varies widely between and within different leakage sites. In rare circumstances, the release of CO 2 can be a self-enhancing and/or eruptive process; this possibility should be assessed in the case of CO 2 leakage from storage reservoirs. Sixth, the hazard to human health has been small in most cases of large surface releases of CO 2 . This could be due to imp...

show abstract

Lessons Learned from Natural and Industrial Analogues for Storage of Carbon Dioxide in Deep Geological Formations

Cited by 75 publications

References 178 publications

The impact of geologic variability on capacity and cost estimates for storing CO2 in deep-saline aquifers

The impact of geologic variability on capacity and cost estimates for storing CO2 in deep-saline aquifers

Comparative Assessment of Status and Opportunities for Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage and Radioactive Waste Disposal in North America

Natural and industrial analogues for release of CO2 from storagereservoirs: Identification of features, events, and processes and lessonslearned

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About