The risk of induced seismicity: is cap‐rock integrity on shaky ground?

Oldenburg, Curtis M.

doi:10.1002/ghg.1299

Cited by 16 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Zoback and Gorelick [] argued that injection‐induced seismicity may render industrial‐scale CCS infeasible, because felt seismic events may reduce public acceptance of CCS and activated faults may act as leakage pathways. However, proper site characterization should identify any significant faults in the storage reservoir allowing for mitigation to reduce the risk of seismic events [ Oldenburg , ; Birkholzer et al ., ]. Faults that are too small to be detected by geophysical investigations (e.g., seismic surveys), are unlikely to produce large seismic events or act as leakage pathways across caprocks [ Mazzoldi et al ., ].…”

Section: Practical Models and Their Applicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Faults that are too small to be detected by geophysical investigations (e.g., seismic surveys), are unlikely to produce large seismic events or act as leakage pathways across caprocks [ Mazzoldi et al ., ]. Also, fractures created in the caprocks may be short‐lived, due to the self‐healing properties of many caprocks [ Oldenburg , ].…”

Section: Practical Models and Their Applicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Status of CO₂storage in deep saline aquifers with emphasis on modeling approaches and practical simulations

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Carbon capture and storage (CCS) is the only viable technology to mitigate carbon emissions while allowing continued large-scale use of fossil fuels. The storage part of CCS involves injection of carbon dioxide, captured from large stationary sources, into deep geological formations. Deep saline aquifers have the largest identified storage potential, with estimated storage capacity sufficient to store emissions from large stationary sources for at least a century. This makes CCS a potentially important bridging technology in the transition to carbon-free energy sources. Injection of CO 2 into deep saline aquifers leads to a multicomponent, multiphase flow system, in which geomechanics, geochemistry, and nonisothermal effects may be important. While the general system can be highly complex and involve many coupled, nonlinear partial differential equations, the underlying physics can sometimes lead to important simplifications. For example, the large density difference between injected CO 2 and brine may lead to relatively fast buoyant segregation, making an assumption of vertical equilibrium reasonable. Such simplifying assumptions lead to a range of simplified governing equations whose solutions have provided significant practical insights into system behavior, including improved estimates of storage capacity, easy-to-compute estimates of CO 2 spatial migration and pressure response, and quantitative estimates of leakage risk. When these modeling studies are coupled with observations from well-characterized injection operations, understanding of the overall system behavior is enhanced significantly. This improved understanding shows that, while economic and policy challenges remain, CO 2 storage in deep saline aquifers appears to be a viable technology and can contribute substantially to climate change solutions.

show abstract

Section: Practical Models and Their Applicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Practical Models and Their Applicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Status of CO₂storage in deep saline aquifers with emphasis on modeling approaches and practical simulations

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…All the presented numerical simulations are performed with the fully coupled finite element code CODE_BRIGHT (Olivella et al, 1994(Olivella et al, , 1996, which solves non-isothermal two-phase flow in deformable porous media. 2.4 1.5 Solid specific heat capacity (J kg −1 K −1 ) 874 874 Linear thermal expansion coefficient ( • C −1 ) 10 −5 10 −5 S l is the liquid saturation degree Review statement.…”

Section: Appendix Amentioning

confidence: 99%

Response to referee1, paper Solid Earth

Vilarrasa¹

2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Geologic carbon storage, as well as other geoenergy applications, such as geothermal energy, seasonal natural gas storage and subsurface energy storage imply fluid injection and/or extraction that causes changes in rock stress field and may induce (micro)seismicity. If felt, seismicity has a negative effect on public perception and may jeopardize wellbore stability and damage infrastructure. Thus, induced earthquakes should be minimized to successfully deploy geo-energies. However, numerous processes may trigger induced seismicity, which contribute to making it complex and translates into a limited forecast ability of current predictive models. We review the triggering mechanisms of induced seismicity. Specifically, we analyze (1) the impact of pore pressure evolution and the effect that properties of the injected fluid have on fracture and/or fault stability; (2) non-isothermal effects caused by the fact that the injected fluid usually reaches the injection formation at a lower temperature than that of the rock, inducing rock contraction, thermal stress reduction and stress redistribution around the cooled region; (3) local stress changes induced when lowpermeability faults cross the injection formation, which may reduce their stability and eventually cause fault reactivation; (4) stress transfer caused by seismic or aseismic slip; and (5) geochemical effects, which may be especially relevant in carbonate-containing formations. We also review characterization techniques developed by the authors to reduce the uncertainty in rock properties and subsurface heterogeneity both for the screening of injection sites and for the operation of projects. Based on the review, we propose a methodology based on proper site characterization, monitoring and pressure management to minimize induced seismicity.Published by Copernicus Publications on behalf of the European Geosciences Union.

show abstract

“…If the seismic events are strong enough to be felt at the surface, public acceptance of a GCS operation is likely to decrease and may even lead to the abandonment of a project (Deichmann and Giardini, 2009). It should however be noted, that no significant seismic events have been reported related to GCS operations, and that proper GCS site selection reduces the risk of induced seismicity (Oldenburg, 2012;Zhang et al, 2013). In order to reduce the risk of seismic events, regulators often limit the allowable injection-induced pressure increase based on pre-injection pressure in the injection formation or critical stress regime.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Active pressure management through brine production for basin-wide deployment of geologic carbon sequestration

Bandilla

Celia

2017

International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In order for carbon capture and storage (CCS) to have a significant impact on anthropogenic carbon emissions, large volumes of carbon dioxide (CO 2) will need to be captured and stored in the subsurface. It is therefore likely that multiple storage operations will access the same storage reservoir, leading to the potential for overlapping pressure responses. Pressure management through brine production is an approach to reduce the pressure response of injection operations, concomitantly reducing the potential for overlap. In this study numerical modeling is used to simulate the basin-wide deployment of CCS in the Illinois Basin, USA to determine the potential impact of brine production on pressure increase at the injection wells and the Areas of Review (the area that the US Environmental Protection agency deems at risk for CO 2 and brine leakage; AoR) of the injection operations. The results show that brine production can reduce the combined size of AoRs by about one order of magnitude, if a volume of brine equivalent to the volume of injected CO 2 is produced. Sites with low injection rates and/or favorable storage properties (i.e., high permeability and porosity, large thickness and depth) may not need pressure management, if the critical pressure is only exceeded within the CO 2 plume. Injection of CO 2 at locations with favorable storage properties leads to a combined AoR 30% smaller than if the injection sites are co-located with large stationary sources. However, pipeline networks would need to be developed to transport CO 2 from the sources to the injection sites. If the produced brine is to be disposed through reinjection into the subsurface, the reinjection formation needs to be hydraulically isolated from the storage formation, as to not negate the effect of pressure management. The results also show that injectivity does not seem to be a major issue in the Illinois Basin, with only four out of 54 hypothetical CCS sites exceeding the allowable pressure increase set to prevent injection-induced seismicity. Unfortunately, brine production is not an effective strategy to control the maximum pressure increase at the four sites, so that a reduction in injection rates is necessary. If the injections occur at locations more favorable for injection, pressures are well below the maximum allowable levels, while maintaining the same basin-wide injection rates.

show abstract

The risk of induced seismicity: is cap‐rock integrity on shaky ground?

Cited by 16 publications

References 2 publications

Status of CO₂storage in deep saline aquifers with emphasis on modeling approaches and practical simulations

Status of CO₂storage in deep saline aquifers with emphasis on modeling approaches and practical simulations

Response to referee1, paper Solid Earth

Active pressure management through brine production for basin-wide deployment of geologic carbon sequestration

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

The risk of induced seismicity: is cap‐rock integrity on shaky ground?

Cited by 16 publications

References 2 publications

Status of CO2storage in deep saline aquifers with emphasis on modeling approaches and practical simulations

Status of CO2storage in deep saline aquifers with emphasis on modeling approaches and practical simulations

Response to referee1, paper Solid Earth

Active pressure management through brine production for basin-wide deployment of geologic carbon sequestration

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Status of CO₂storage in deep saline aquifers with emphasis on modeling approaches and practical simulations

Status of CO₂storage in deep saline aquifers with emphasis on modeling approaches and practical simulations