2022
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijggc.2022.103585
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Sensitivity of geophysical techniques for monitoring secondary CO2 storage plumes

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
15
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
1
1

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 24 publications
(25 citation statements)
references
References 63 publications
(68 reference statements)
1
15
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In this case, the value 0.4 is selected as the threshold based on visual inspection of the results. The lack of sensitivity of the time‐lapse seismic response to fluid changes is also observed in other studies (Gasperikova et al., 2022; Schmitt et al., 2022). Figure 9 shows the inverted porosity and CO 2 saturations obtained using seismic data alone.…”
Section: Applicationsupporting
confidence: 77%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…In this case, the value 0.4 is selected as the threshold based on visual inspection of the results. The lack of sensitivity of the time‐lapse seismic response to fluid changes is also observed in other studies (Gasperikova et al., 2022; Schmitt et al., 2022). Figure 9 shows the inverted porosity and CO 2 saturations obtained using seismic data alone.…”
Section: Applicationsupporting
confidence: 77%
“…Time‐lapse (4‐D) seismic acquisition is one of the monitoring techniques widely deployed in GCS projects, where a series of seismic surveys are sequentially acquired to quantify changes in reservoir properties (e.g., elastic properties, fluid pressure and saturation) during and after CO 2 injection (Caspari et al., 2011; A. Chadwick et al., 2010; Egorov et al., 2017; Glubokovskikh et al., 2020; Grude et al., 2013; B. Li & Li, 2021; Rubino et al., 2011). However, in some cases, depending on the rock stiffness, the time‐lapse seismic response might be insensitive to fluid changes (Gasperikova et al., 2022; Schmitt et al., 2022). To address this issue, non‐seismic monitoring techniques have been investigated and successfully applied to GCS.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The spring stiffness k can be expressed as: (1) where E is Young's modulus of silicon (130 GPa [29], [30]), b and h are width (17 μm) and length (500 μm) of the spring section respectively, and L is the length of spring beam (7 mm). Taking the derivative of (1) with respect to temperature and dividing both sides by k, we have (2) It can be seen that the temperature coefficient of the spring stiffness comprises the contribution of the Young's modulus (-80 ppm/K [29] to -60 ppm/K [30]) and the thermal expansion coefficient of silicon (2.6 ppm/K [31]). Considering that the fixture for installation and other parts that may introduce additional temperature effects, the overall temperature coefficient of the assembled MEMS gravity sensor was measured to be 87.3±3.3 μGal/mK in our case.…”
Section: Temperature Controlmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…igh precision gravimeters have found important applications in carbon sequestration [1], [2], mineral exploration [3], geology [4], volcanology [5], and groundwater storage monitoring [6] based on the sub-surface density anomalies derived from the gravity data. In general, gravimeters can be divided into absolute and relative types, depending on the principle used to measure gravitational accelerations.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…seismic and pressure monitoring, and geochemical techniques, e.g. pH sensors, are available for the monitoring of storage sites [5,[21][22][23][24][25][26]. Geochemical tracers can be suitable proxies for leakage detection by differentiating natural from injected CO 2 [17,27].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%