含盐含水层的二氧化碳固存与排放

E. Ennin
{"title":"含盐含水层的二氧化碳固存与排放","authors":"E. Ennin","doi":"10.2118/200911-ms","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Geological storage of CO2 in saline aquifers is recognized as a favorable technique that could deliver a significant decrease in CO2 emissions over the short to medium-term. However, the major risk is the possibility of leakage and injection limitation due to pore pressure. This research investigates the three major mechanisms of CO2 trapping to determine which method safely captures the most CO2, interrogates the pore pressure effect on storage, and compares traditional core flooding methods for CO2 storage with CO2 drainage which is more practical in the aquifer.\n A core flooding set up was built to replicate reservoir conditions of the Anadarko Basin in Texas, USA. The research involved three reservoir pay zone rocks obtained from depths of about 7687ft that were pieced together to undergo core flooding at 4400psi-5200psi and a temperature of 168°F. In the first study conducted the core was flooded with supercritical CO2 and brine of salinity 4000ppm to generate relative permeability curves to represent drainage and imbibition. For the duration of the 3rd, 4th, and 5th studies the core saturated with brine is flooded with CO2 at pressures of 4400psi, 4800psi, and 5200psi. Parameters like the volume of CO2 captured, connate water volumes, differential pressure, Ph of produced water, trapping efficiency, relative permeability, and fractional flow curves are noted.\n After scrutinizing the result it is observed that the highest volume of CO2 is captured by solubility trapping followed by structural trapping and residual trapping in that order. From this research, it can be concluded that CO2 trapping, at least for these reservoir rocks, is not affected by pore pressure. Also contrary to most practices CO2 storage is best replaced in the laboratory using drainage experiments instead of the widely used relative permeability approach.","PeriodicalId":11142,"journal":{"name":"Day 3 Wed, June 30, 2021","volume":"11 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Carbon Dioxide Sequestration and Drainage in Saline Aquifer\",\"authors\":\"E. Ennin\",\"doi\":\"10.2118/200911-ms\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n Geological storage of CO2 in saline aquifers is recognized as a favorable technique that could deliver a significant decrease in CO2 emissions over the short to medium-term. However, the major risk is the possibility of leakage and injection limitation due to pore pressure. This research investigates the three major mechanisms of CO2 trapping to determine which method safely captures the most CO2, interrogates the pore pressure effect on storage, and compares traditional core flooding methods for CO2 storage with CO2 drainage which is more practical in the aquifer.\\n A core flooding set up was built to replicate reservoir conditions of the Anadarko Basin in Texas, USA. The research involved three reservoir pay zone rocks obtained from depths of about 7687ft that were pieced together to undergo core flooding at 4400psi-5200psi and a temperature of 168°F. In the first study conducted the core was flooded with supercritical CO2 and brine of salinity 4000ppm to generate relative permeability curves to represent drainage and imbibition. For the duration of the 3rd, 4th, and 5th studies the core saturated with brine is flooded with CO2 at pressures of 4400psi, 4800psi, and 5200psi. Parameters like the volume of CO2 captured, connate water volumes, differential pressure, Ph of produced water, trapping efficiency, relative permeability, and fractional flow curves are noted.\\n After scrutinizing the result it is observed that the highest volume of CO2 is captured by solubility trapping followed by structural trapping and residual trapping in that order. From this research, it can be concluded that CO2 trapping, at least for these reservoir rocks, is not affected by pore pressure. Also contrary to most practices CO2 storage is best replaced in the laboratory using drainage experiments instead of the widely used relative permeability approach.\",\"PeriodicalId\":11142,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Day 3 Wed, June 30, 2021\",\"volume\":\"11 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-06-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Day 3 Wed, June 30, 2021\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2118/200911-ms\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Day 3 Wed, June 30, 2021","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2118/200911-ms","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在含盐含水层中地质储存二氧化碳被认为是一种有利的技术,可以在中短期内显著减少二氧化碳的排放。然而,主要的风险是由于孔隙压力导致的泄漏和注入限制的可能性。本文研究了二氧化碳捕获的三种主要机制,以确定哪种方法能安全捕获最多的二氧化碳,探讨了孔隙压力对封存的影响,并比较了传统的岩心驱油封存方法和更适用于含水层的二氧化碳排水方法。为了模拟美国德克萨斯州Anadarko盆地的油藏条件,建立了岩心驱油装置。该研究涉及从约7687英尺深处获得的三个储层产层岩石,这些岩石被拼凑在一起,在4400psi-5200psi和168°F的温度下进行岩心驱油。在第一次研究中,岩心被超临界CO2和盐度为4000ppm的盐水淹没,以生成相对渗透率曲线,以表示排水和渗吸。在第三、第四和第五次研究中,在4400psi、4800psi和5200psi的压力下,将饱和盐水岩心注入二氧化碳。捕获的二氧化碳体积、原生水体积、压差、采出水的Ph值、捕获效率、相对渗透率和分流曲线等参数都被记录下来。在仔细检查结果后,观察到最大体积的CO2被溶解度捕获,其次是结构捕获和剩余捕获。从本研究可以得出结论,至少对于这些储集岩来说,CO2的捕集不受孔隙压力的影响。此外,与大多数做法相反,最好在实验室中使用排水实验代替广泛使用的相对渗透率方法来替代二氧化碳储存。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Carbon Dioxide Sequestration and Drainage in Saline Aquifer
Geological storage of CO2 in saline aquifers is recognized as a favorable technique that could deliver a significant decrease in CO2 emissions over the short to medium-term. However, the major risk is the possibility of leakage and injection limitation due to pore pressure. This research investigates the three major mechanisms of CO2 trapping to determine which method safely captures the most CO2, interrogates the pore pressure effect on storage, and compares traditional core flooding methods for CO2 storage with CO2 drainage which is more practical in the aquifer. A core flooding set up was built to replicate reservoir conditions of the Anadarko Basin in Texas, USA. The research involved three reservoir pay zone rocks obtained from depths of about 7687ft that were pieced together to undergo core flooding at 4400psi-5200psi and a temperature of 168°F. In the first study conducted the core was flooded with supercritical CO2 and brine of salinity 4000ppm to generate relative permeability curves to represent drainage and imbibition. For the duration of the 3rd, 4th, and 5th studies the core saturated with brine is flooded with CO2 at pressures of 4400psi, 4800psi, and 5200psi. Parameters like the volume of CO2 captured, connate water volumes, differential pressure, Ph of produced water, trapping efficiency, relative permeability, and fractional flow curves are noted. After scrutinizing the result it is observed that the highest volume of CO2 is captured by solubility trapping followed by structural trapping and residual trapping in that order. From this research, it can be concluded that CO2 trapping, at least for these reservoir rocks, is not affected by pore pressure. Also contrary to most practices CO2 storage is best replaced in the laboratory using drainage experiments instead of the widely used relative permeability approach.
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
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