1887
Volume 73, Issue 6
  • E-ISSN: 1365-2478

Abstract

ABSTRACT

CO geological sequestration (CGS) is a crucial strategy to mitigate the greenhouse effect. The quantitative correspondence between CO saturation and acoustic response serves as the essential basis for monitoring CO migration. However, due to dynamic fluid interactions between supercritical CO and brine/oil in porous media, acoustic propagation behaviour is extremely complicated, even at the same saturation during drainage and imbibition processes. This study is motivated to evaluate the acoustic characteristics of the above porous stratum containing CO. To do so, pore fluid parameter models specific to CGS are consolidated and refined, with the consideration of CO solubility. Meanwhile, Lo's theory is modified to describe both partial flow and global flow in CO‐saturated porous media, capturing key mechanisms of patchy distribution and alterations in capillary pressure and relative permeability during drainage and imbibition. By combining these procedures, the wave propagation characteristics within CGS scenarios are systematically analysed. It is shown that CO exhibits higher solubility than gases, leading to a distinct two‐stage acoustic response, corresponding to its dissolved and free states. Relative permeability affects both compressional and shear waves, whereas capillary pressure and patchy distribution mainly affect compressional wave propagation. Notably, compressional waves exhibit heightened sensitivity to free CO content and fluid flow dynamics, especially at ultrasound frequencies. The modified acoustic propagation theory demonstrates superior performance in characterizing compressional velocities during both drainage and imbibition. These findings highlight the dynamic fluid flow effects in CGS, providing a theoretical framework for analysing acoustic propagation characteristics.

© 2025 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers. © 2025 European Association of Geoscientists & Engineers.
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.70065
2025-08-21
2026-02-08

  • From This Site

    /content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.70065
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Ayub, M., and R. G.Bentsen. 2005. “Experimental Testing of Interfacial Coupling in Two‐Phase Flow in Porous Media.” Petroleum Science and Technology23, no. 7–8: 863–897. https://doi.org/10.1081/LFT‐200034457.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Bakhshian, S., S. A.Hosseini, and L. W.Lake. 2020. “CO2‐Brine Relative Permeability and Capillary Pressure of Tuscaloosa Sandstone: Effect of Anisotropy.” Advances in Water Resources135: 103464. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advwatres.2019.103464.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Batzle, M., and Z.Wang. 1992. “Seismic Properties of Pore Fluids.” Geophysics57, no. 11: 1396–1408. https://doi.org/10.1190/1.1443207.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Berryman, J. G.1980. “Confirmation of Biot's Theory.” Applied Physics Letters37, no. 4: 382–384. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.91951.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Biot, M. A.1956a. “Theory of Propagation of Elastic Waves in a Fluid‐Saturated Porous Solid. I. Low‐Frequency Range.” Journal of the Acoustical Society of America28, no. 2: 168–178. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.1908239.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Biot, M. A.1956b. “Theory of Propagation of Elastic Waves in a Fluid‐Saturated Porous Solid. II. Higher Frequency Range.” Journal of the Acoustical Society of America28, no. 2: 179–191. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.1908241.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Biot, M. A., and D. G.Willis. 1957. “The Elastic Coefficients of the Theory of Consolidation.” Journal of Applied Mechanics24: 594–601. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4011606.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Brie, A., F.Pampuri, A. F.Marsala, and O.Meazza1995. “Shear Sonic Interpretation in Gas‐Bearing Sands.” In SPE Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition? (SPE–30595). SPE. https://doi.org/10.2118/30595‐MS.
  9. Carcione, J. M., S.Picotti, D.Gei, and G.Rossi2006. “Physics and Seismic Modeling for Monitoring CO2 Storage.” Pure and Applied Geophysics163: 175–207. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00024‐005‐0002‐1.
     [Google Scholar]
  10. Chang, C., T. J.Kneafsey, and Q.Zhou. 2021. “Experimental Study of Three‐Dimensional CO2‐Water Drainage and Fracture‐Matrix Interactions in Fractured Porous Media.” Advances in Water Resources155: 104008. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advwatres.2021.104008.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. DeRuiter, R. A., L. J.Nash, and M. S.Singletary. 1994. “Solubility and Displacement Behavior of a Viscous Crude With CO2 and Hydrocarbon Gases.” SPE Reservoir Engineering9, no. 02: 101–106. https://doi.org/10.2118/20523‐PA.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Duan, Z., R.Sun, C.Zhu, and I. M.Chou. 2006. “An Improved Model for the Calculation of CO2 Solubility in Aqueous Solutions Containing Na+, K+, Ca2+, Mg2+, Cl−, and SO42−.” Marine Chemistry98, no. 2–4: 131–139. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marchem.2005.09.001.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Dupuy, B., A.Romdhane, P.Eliasson, et al. 2017. “Quantitative Seismic Characterization of CO2 at the Sleipner Storage Site, North Sea.” Interpretation5, no. 4: SS23–SS42. https://doi.org/10.1190/INT‐2017‐0013.1.
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Emera, M. K., and H. K.Sarma. 2008. “A Genetic Algorithm‐Based Model to Predict Co‐Oil Physical Properties for Dead and Live Oil.” Journal of Canadian Petroleum Technology47, no. 02: 52‐61. https://doi.org/10.2118/08‐02‐52.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Goncalves, F. A., and J.Kestin. 1977. “The Viscosity of NaCl and KCl Solutions in the Range 25–50°C.” Berichte Der Bunsengesellschaft Für Physikalische Chemie81, no. 11: 1156–1161. https://doi.org/10.1002/bbpc.19770811108.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Guo, H., Y.Chen, Q.Hu, W.Lu, W.Ou, and L.Geng. 2014. “Quantitative Raman Spectroscopic Investigation of Geo‐Fluids High‐Pressure Phase Equilibria: Part I. Accurate Calibration and Determination of CO2 Solubility in Water From 273.15 to 573.15 K and From 10 to 120 MPa.” Fluid Phase Equilibria382: 70–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fluid.2014.08.032.
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Han, D. H., M.Sun, and J.Liu. 2012. “Velocity and Density of CO2‐Oil Miscible Mixtures.” In SEG International Exposition and Annual Meeting (SEG–2012). SEG.
  18. Hao, Y., D.Yang, and Y.Zhou. 2016. “A Feasibility Study of CO2 Geologic Sequestration Integrating Reservoir Simulation, Rock‐Physics Theory, and Seismic Modeling.” Geophysics81, no. 5: M71–M82. https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2015‐0614.1.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Hemmati‐Sarapardeh, A., S.Ayatollahi, A.Zolghadr, M. H.Ghazanfari, and M.Masihi. 2014. “Experimental Determination of Equilibrium Interfacial Tension for Nitrogen‐Crude Oil During the Gas Injection Process: The Role of Temperature, Pressure, and Composition.” Journal of Chemical & Engineering Data59, no. 11: 3461–3469. https://doi.org/10.1021/je5004274.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Islam, A. W., and E. S.Carlson. 2012. “Viscosity Models and Effects of Dissolved CO2.” Energy & Fuels26, no. 8: 5330–5336. https://doi.org/10.1021/ef3006228.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Jenkins, C.2020. “The State of the Art in Monitoring and Verification: An Update Five Years On.” International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control100: 103118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2020.103118.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Kim, J., T.Matsuoka, and Z.Xue. 2011. “Monitoring and Detecting CO2 Injected Into Water‐Saturated Sandstone With Joint Seismic and Resistivity Measurements.” Exploration Geophysics42, no. 1: 58–68. https://doi.org/10.1071/EG11002.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Lebedev, M., O.Bilenko, V.Mikhaltsevitch, M.Pervukhina, and B.Gurevich. 2014. “Laboratory Measurements of Ultrasonic Velocities in CO2 Saturated Brines.” Energy Procedia63: 4273–4280. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2014.11.462.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. LemmonE. W., M. O.McLinden, and D. G.Friend. 2011. “Thermophysical Properties of Fluid Systems.” In NIST Chemistry webBook, NIST Standard Reference Database Number 69, edited by P. J.Linstrom and W. G.Mallard, National Institute of Standards and Technology. http://webbook.nist.gov/chemistry/fluid/.
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Leong, Z. X., T.Zhu, and A. Y.Sun. 2024. “Time‐Lapse Seismic Inversion for CO2 Saturation With SeisCO2Net: An Application to Frio‐II Site.” International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control132: 104058. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2024.104058.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Le Ravalec, M., Y.Guéguen, and T.Chelidze. 1996. “Elastic Wave Velocities in Partially Saturated Rocks: Saturation Hysteresis.” Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth101, no. B1: 837–844. https://doi.org/10.1029/95JB02879.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. Li, D., B. J.Graupner, and S.Bauer. 2011. “A Method for Calculating the Liquid Density for the CO2–H2O–NaCl System Under CO2 Storage Condition.” Energy Procedia4: 3817–3824. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2011.02.317.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Lo, W. C., and G.Sposito. 2013. “Acoustic Waves in Unsaturated Soils.” Water Resources Research49, no. 9: 5674–5684. https://doi.org/10.1002/wrcr.20423.
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Lo, W. C., G.Sposito, and E.Majer. 2005. “Wave Propagation Through Elastic Porous Media Containing Two Immiscible Fluids.” Water Resources Research41, no. 2: W02025. https://doi.org/10.1029/2004WR003162.
     [Google Scholar]
  30. Lo, W. C., C. L.Yeh, and J. W.Lee. 2015. “Effect of Viscous Cross Coupling Between Two Immiscible Fluids on Elastic Wave Propagation and Attenuation in Unsaturated Porous Media.” Advances in Water Resources83: 207–222. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advwatres.2015.06.002.
     [Google Scholar]
  31. Mavko, G., T.Mukerji, and J.Dvorkin. 2020. The Rock Physics Handbook. Cambridge University Press.
     [Google Scholar]
  32. Papageorgiou, G., K.Amalokwu, and M.Chapman. 2016. “Theoretical Derivation of a Brie‐Like Fluid Mixing Law.” Geophysical Prospecting64, no. 4‐Advances in Rock Physics: 1048–1053. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365‐2478.12380.
     [Google Scholar]
  33. Perozzi, L., B.Giroux, D. R.Schmitt, and E.Gloaguen. 2017. “Sensitivity of Seismic Response for Monitoring Storage in a Low Porosity Reservoir of the St Lawrence Lowlands, Québec, Canada: Part 2–Synthetic Modeling.” Greenhouse Gases: Science and Technology7, no. 4: 613–623. https://doi.org/10.1002/ghg.1670.
     [Google Scholar]
  34. Picotti, S., J. M.Carcione, D.Gei, G.Rossi, and J. E.Santos. 2012. “Seismic Modeling to Monitor CO2 Geological Storage: The Atzbach‐Schwanenstadt Gas Field.” Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth117, no. B6: B06103. https://doi.org/10.1029/2011JB008540.
     [Google Scholar]
  35. Pruess, K., C.Oldenburg, and G.Moridis. 1999. “TOUGH2 User's Guide, Version 2.0.” In Earth Sciences Division, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, 198. University of California.
     [Google Scholar]
  36. Qi, Y., X.Zhang, and L.Liu. 2022. “Acoustic Propagation Characteristics of Unsaturated Porous Media Containing CO2 and Oil.” Applied Sciences12, no. 17: 8899. https://doi.org/10.3390/app12178899.
     [Google Scholar]
  37. Ratnakar, R. R., E. J.Lewis, and B.Dindoruk. 2020. “Effect of Dilution on Acoustic and Transport Properties of Reservoir Fluid Systems and Their Interplay.” SPE Journal25, no. 06: 2867–2880. https://doi.org/10.2118/190480‐PA.
     [Google Scholar]
  38. Rozhko, A. Y.2019. “Bulk Moduli and Seismic Attenuation in Partially Saturated Rocks: Hysteresis of Liquid Bridges Effect.” Geophysical Prospecting67, no. 5: 1404–1430. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365‐2478.12782.
     [Google Scholar]
  39. Simon, R., and D. J.Graue. 1965. “Generalized Correlations for Predicting Solubility, Swelling and Viscosity Behavior of CO2‐Crude Oil Systems.” Journal of Petroleum Technology17, no. 01: 102–106. https://doi.org/10.2118/917‐PA.
     [Google Scholar]
  40. Solazzi, S. G., L.Guarracino, J. G.Rubino, and K.Holliger. 2019. “Saturation Hysteresis Effects on the Seismic Signatures of Partially Saturated Heterogeneous Porous Rocks.” Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth124, no. 11: 11316–11335. https://doi.org/10.1029/2019JB017726.
     [Google Scholar]
  41. Spycher, N., and K.Pruess. 2005. “CO2‐H2O Mixtures in the Geological Sequestration of CO2. II. Partitioning in Chloride Brines at 12–100 C and up to 600 Bar.” Geochimica Et Cosmochimica Acta69, no. 13: 3309–3320. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gca.2005.01.015.
     [Google Scholar]
  42. Sun, C., J.Fortin, J. V.Borgomano, et al. 2022. “Influence of Fluid Distribution on Seismic Dispersion and Attenuation in Partially Saturated Limestone.” Journal of Geophysical Research: Solid Earth127, no. 5: e2021JB023867. https://doi.org/10.1029/2021JB023867.
     [Google Scholar]
  43. Sun, Y., Q.Li, D.Yang, and X.Liu. 2016. “Laboratory Core Flooding Experimental Systems for CO2 Geosequestration: An Updated Review Over the Past Decade.” Journal of Rock Mechanics and Geotechnical Engineering8, no. 1: 113–126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrmge.2015.12.001.
     [Google Scholar]
  44. Van Genuchten, M. T.1980. “A Closed‐Form Equation for Predicting the Hydraulic Conductivity of Unsaturated Soils.” Soil Science Society of America Journal44, no. 5: 892–898. https://doi.org/10.2136/sssaj1980.03615995004400050002x.
     [Google Scholar]
  45. Wang, Z., W. P.Harbert, R. M.Dilmore, and L.Huang. 2018. “Modeling of Time‐Lapse Seismic Monitoring Using CO2 Leakage Simulations for a Model CO2 Storage Site With Realistic Geology: Application in Assessment of Early Leak‐Detection Capabilities.” International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control76: 39–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2018.06.011.
     [Google Scholar]
  46. Yan, W., S.Huang, and E. H.Stenby. 2011. “Measurement and Modeling of CO2 Solubility in NaCl Brine and CO2–Saturated NaCl Brine Density.” International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control5, no. 6: 1460–1477. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2011.08.004.
     [Google Scholar]
  47. Yang, X., T. A.Buscheck, K.Mansoor, et al. 2019. “Assessment of Geophysical Monitoring Methods for Detection of Brine and CO2 Leakage in Drinking Water Aquifers.” International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control90: 102803. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2019.102803.
     [Google Scholar]
  48. Yun, A., and I.Song. 2022. “Pore Fluid Substitution Effects on Elastic Wave Propagation in Berea Sandstone: Implication to Seismic Monitoring of CO2 Geologic Storage.” International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control115: 103609. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2022.103609.
     [Google Scholar]
  49. Zhang, Y., O.Nishizawa, T.Kiyama, and Z.Xue. 2015. “Saturation‐Path Dependency of P‐Wave Velocity and Attenuation in Sandstone Saturated With CO2 and Brine Revealed by Simultaneous Measurements of Waveforms and X‐Ray Computed Tomography Images.” Geophysics80, no. 4: D403–D415. https://doi.org/10.1190/geo2014‐0289.1.
     [Google Scholar]
  50. Zhuang, L., S. M.Hassanizadeh, D.Bhatt, and C. J.van Duijn. 2021. “Spontaneous Imbibition and Drainage of Water in a Thin Porous Layer: Experiments and Modeling.” Transport in Porous Media139, no. 2: 381–396. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11242‐021‐01670‐7.
     [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.70065
Loading
Dynamic Fluid Flow Effects on Acoustic Propagation Characteristics of Unsaturated Porous Media in CO2 Geological Sequestration
Geophysical Prospecting 73, e70065 (2025); https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2478.70065
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.70065
/content/journals/10.1111/1365-2478.70065
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): acoustics; numerical study; reservoir geophysics; rock physics; velocity analysis

Most Cited This Month Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error