Modeling CO₂plume migration based on calibration of injection and post-injection pressure response at the AEP Mountaineer Project

Abstract

Supercritical CO 2 injection was carried out at the AEP Mountaineer CO 2 Capture and Geological Storage Project from October 2009 until May 2011. Approximately 27 000 MT and 10 000 MT were injected into the Copper Ridge dolomite formation and Rose Run sandstone formation, respectively. A 2-D radial-cylindrical model based on 'average' conditions in the study area was developed from integration of well-log data. STOMP-CO 2 simulations were carried out to calibrate the observed pressure response using a trial-and-error procedure. This involved varying: (i) permeability near the injection well, (ii) permeability of the far-fi eld region, and (iii) relative permeability model coeffi cients. Non-unique combinations of these parameters were found to produce similar pressure matches, but different estimates of plume migration. For the Copper Ridge formation, excellent matches were obtained for the injection pressure/rate data at AEP-1 and observed pressures at MW-2, located ∼2200 feet away. Estimates of radial plume migration range between 925 and 975 ft. For the Rose Run formation, excellent matches were obtained for the injection pressure data at AEP-2 and observed pressure at MW-3, ∼125 feet away, although the match with MW-1, located ∼2200 feet away, was less satisfactory. Estimates of radial plume migration range between 460 and 510 ft. The modeling approach and results presented here represent a signifi cant and unique case study of post-injection modeling at CO 2 storage locations -a critical aspect for successful permit closure in accordance with the EPA requirements.

Investigation of uncertainty in CO2 reservoir models: A sensitivity analysis of relative permeability parameter values

“…Once field data are available at a given site, history matching and model calibration can reduce model uncertainty and increase the predictive power of site specific models. In such efforts, core-scale relative permeability models are up-scaled to field-scale relative permeability models (Lomeland et al 2012), but non-unique relationships between intrinsic and relative permeability models may result from such model calibration (Mishra et al 2014). In addition, the 2D homogeneous model used in this work represents average intrinsic permeability of the reservoir, but heterogeneity in intrinsic permeability may attenuate the effects of relative permeability uncertainty reducing the variance of the CO 2 storage capacity.…”

Leveraging operational information from wastewater injection wells to evaluate CO2 injection performance for carbon storage applications in the Appalachian Basin

“…Average flow zone permeabilities were then calculated by taking the average permeability for each formation's flow zone at each well using combination of flowmeter indicators and well test results (Table 3). The lower Copper Ridge average permeability value of 661 × 10 −9 m 2 is comparable to the permeability for the vugular Copper Ridge found in core in southern Ohio, 28 providing confidence in the permeability input into the models.…”

CO2 plume and pressure monitoring through pressure sensors above the caprock

“…A. Hosseini, 2019;S. Hosseini & Alfi, 2016;Kim & Hosseini, 2014;Mishra et al, 2014;Wiese et al, 2013;Zeidouni & Vilarrasa, 2016).…”