美国密歇根州和伊利诺伊盆地奥陶纪圣彼得砂岩的地质碳汇潜力

Q2 Earth and Planetary Sciences
D. Barnes, K. Ellett, J. Rupp
{"title":"美国密歇根州和伊利诺伊盆地奥陶纪圣彼得砂岩的地质碳汇潜力","authors":"D. Barnes, K. Ellett, J. Rupp","doi":"10.1306/EG.02071716007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Cambrian–Ordovician strata of the midwestern United States are considered a promising reservoir for geologic storage of carbon dioxide. To assess the potential of the Ordovician St. Peter Sandstone, storage-resource estimates were generated using a hierarchical approach to estimating prospective storage resources. The method employs a series of increasingly sophisticated analyses to better facilitate an understanding of the uncertainty in the estimates. Results demonstrate how uncertainty of storage-resource estimates varies as a function of data availability and quality as well as the underlying assumptions used in the application of specific storage efficiency factors. In the simplest analysis, storage-resource estimates were calculated from updated regional-scale mapping of the gross thickness of the formation and by applying a single best estimate of the mean porosity for the entire formation. This analysis follows the technique prescribed by the US Department of Energy and yields storage-resource estimates ranging from 3.3 to 35.1 billion t CO 2 in the Michigan Basin and 1.0 to 11.0 billion t CO 2 in the Illinois Basin at the 10% and 90% probability levels. The second analysis incorporated generalized models of the diagenetic history of the formation throughout the two basins by implementing depth-dependent functions of porosity that lead to more realistic portrayals of spatially variable results. Similar resource estimates were calculated for the Michigan Basin, but reduced estimates (43%) were found for the Illinois Basin. The third analysis explicitly accounted for the local-scale spatial variability in reservoir quality using net-porosity calculations, resulting in a significant increase in the low-range resource estimate for the Michigan Basin and dramatic increases for Illinois Basin resource estimates (factor of 3 to 11 increases). A fourth analysis was conducted for the Michigan Basin that used advanced reservoir characterization to define reservoir properties for multiple reservoir facies and yielded resource estimates significantly larger than the third analysis and a larger range of uncertainty. This study highlights how different factors impact the expected uncertainty in storage-resource estimates, and analysis suggests that estimates from the first two approaches provide excessively conservative results, whereas the second two approaches tend to overestimate the resource.","PeriodicalId":11706,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Geosciences","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1306/EG.02071716007","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Geologic-carbon-sequestration potential of the Ordovician St. Peter Sandstone, Michigan and Illinois Basins, United States\",\"authors\":\"D. Barnes, K. Ellett, J. Rupp\",\"doi\":\"10.1306/EG.02071716007\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Cambrian–Ordovician strata of the midwestern United States are considered a promising reservoir for geologic storage of carbon dioxide. To assess the potential of the Ordovician St. Peter Sandstone, storage-resource estimates were generated using a hierarchical approach to estimating prospective storage resources. The method employs a series of increasingly sophisticated analyses to better facilitate an understanding of the uncertainty in the estimates. Results demonstrate how uncertainty of storage-resource estimates varies as a function of data availability and quality as well as the underlying assumptions used in the application of specific storage efficiency factors. In the simplest analysis, storage-resource estimates were calculated from updated regional-scale mapping of the gross thickness of the formation and by applying a single best estimate of the mean porosity for the entire formation. This analysis follows the technique prescribed by the US Department of Energy and yields storage-resource estimates ranging from 3.3 to 35.1 billion t CO 2 in the Michigan Basin and 1.0 to 11.0 billion t CO 2 in the Illinois Basin at the 10% and 90% probability levels. The second analysis incorporated generalized models of the diagenetic history of the formation throughout the two basins by implementing depth-dependent functions of porosity that lead to more realistic portrayals of spatially variable results. Similar resource estimates were calculated for the Michigan Basin, but reduced estimates (43%) were found for the Illinois Basin. The third analysis explicitly accounted for the local-scale spatial variability in reservoir quality using net-porosity calculations, resulting in a significant increase in the low-range resource estimate for the Michigan Basin and dramatic increases for Illinois Basin resource estimates (factor of 3 to 11 increases). A fourth analysis was conducted for the Michigan Basin that used advanced reservoir characterization to define reservoir properties for multiple reservoir facies and yielded resource estimates significantly larger than the third analysis and a larger range of uncertainty. This study highlights how different factors impact the expected uncertainty in storage-resource estimates, and analysis suggests that estimates from the first two approaches provide excessively conservative results, whereas the second two approaches tend to overestimate the resource.\",\"PeriodicalId\":11706,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Environmental Geosciences\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1306/EG.02071716007\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Environmental Geosciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1306/EG.02071716007\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Earth and Planetary Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental Geosciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1306/EG.02071716007","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Earth and Planetary Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

摘要美国中西部的寒武纪-奥陶纪地层被认为是一个很有前途的二氧化碳地质储层。为了评估奥陶纪圣彼得砂岩的潜力,使用分层方法对潜在储量进行了估算。该方法采用了一系列越来越复杂的分析,以更好地理解估计中的不确定性。结果表明,存储资源估计的不确定性是如何随着数据可用性和质量以及应用特定存储效率因素时使用的基本假设而变化的。在最简单的分析中,储存资源估计值是根据地层总厚度的最新区域尺度映射,并通过应用整个地层平均孔隙度的单一最佳估计值来计算的。该分析遵循了美国能源部规定的技术,在10%和90%的概率水平下,密歇根盆地的储量资源估计为33至351亿吨二氧化碳,伊利诺伊盆地的储量为10至110亿吨二氧化碳。第二种分析通过实现孔隙度的深度相关函数,结合了整个两个盆地地层成岩历史的广义模型,从而更真实地描述了空间变化的结果。对密歇根盆地进行了类似的资源估算,但对伊利诺伊盆地的估算有所减少(43%)。第三次分析使用净孔隙度计算明确说明了储层质量的局部尺度空间变异性,导致密歇根盆地的低范围资源估计显著增加,伊利诺伊盆地的资源估计急剧增加(因子增加3至11)。对密歇根盆地进行了第四次分析,该分析使用先进的储层特征来定义多个储层相的储层性质,并得出了比第三次分析大得多的资源量估计值和更大的不确定性范围。这项研究强调了不同因素如何影响储存资源估计的预期不确定性,分析表明,前两种方法的估计结果过于保守,而后两种方法往往高估了资源。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Geologic-carbon-sequestration potential of the Ordovician St. Peter Sandstone, Michigan and Illinois Basins, United States
ABSTRACT Cambrian–Ordovician strata of the midwestern United States are considered a promising reservoir for geologic storage of carbon dioxide. To assess the potential of the Ordovician St. Peter Sandstone, storage-resource estimates were generated using a hierarchical approach to estimating prospective storage resources. The method employs a series of increasingly sophisticated analyses to better facilitate an understanding of the uncertainty in the estimates. Results demonstrate how uncertainty of storage-resource estimates varies as a function of data availability and quality as well as the underlying assumptions used in the application of specific storage efficiency factors. In the simplest analysis, storage-resource estimates were calculated from updated regional-scale mapping of the gross thickness of the formation and by applying a single best estimate of the mean porosity for the entire formation. This analysis follows the technique prescribed by the US Department of Energy and yields storage-resource estimates ranging from 3.3 to 35.1 billion t CO 2 in the Michigan Basin and 1.0 to 11.0 billion t CO 2 in the Illinois Basin at the 10% and 90% probability levels. The second analysis incorporated generalized models of the diagenetic history of the formation throughout the two basins by implementing depth-dependent functions of porosity that lead to more realistic portrayals of spatially variable results. Similar resource estimates were calculated for the Michigan Basin, but reduced estimates (43%) were found for the Illinois Basin. The third analysis explicitly accounted for the local-scale spatial variability in reservoir quality using net-porosity calculations, resulting in a significant increase in the low-range resource estimate for the Michigan Basin and dramatic increases for Illinois Basin resource estimates (factor of 3 to 11 increases). A fourth analysis was conducted for the Michigan Basin that used advanced reservoir characterization to define reservoir properties for multiple reservoir facies and yielded resource estimates significantly larger than the third analysis and a larger range of uncertainty. This study highlights how different factors impact the expected uncertainty in storage-resource estimates, and analysis suggests that estimates from the first two approaches provide excessively conservative results, whereas the second two approaches tend to overestimate the resource.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Environmental Geosciences
Environmental Geosciences Earth and Planetary Sciences-Earth and Planetary Sciences (all)
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信