1887

Abstract

Summary

Microseismic events have been observed during many fluid injection projects and are generally related to hydraulic fracturing or re-activation of pre-existing, critically stressed weakness zones. However, microseismic events have also been recorded in several cases where injection pressure is quite low and below the estimated fracture pressure. The primarily assumed mechanism for such events is that the rock was critically stressed and brought to failure by small stress changes, related to the load changes and/or pore pressure changes. This paper explains a new and additional possibility to enhance or inhibit the generation of small microseismic events through an interdisciplinary approach based on the Lugeon test analysis. We analyze the successive evolution of injection pressure versus injection rate of CO2. Based on the type of flow patterns, fluid flow is classified into characteristic groups proposed by . Different flow patterns such as turbulent, laminar, and washout were observed throughout the CO2 injection at e.g. In Salah. Mobilization (wash-out) of fines and clogging of pores affect the pore pressure and may destabilize rock blocks. Effective stress acting on fractures also changes upon injection shut-in/restart, possibly causing small displacements of a rock block and result in a low-magnitude microseismic event.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201800057
2018-03-26
2020-04-04
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Bissell, R.C., Vasco, D.W., Atbi, M., Hamdani, M., Okwelegbe, M., and Goldwater, M. H.
    [2011] A full field simulation of the in Salah gas production and CO2 storage project using a coupled geomechanical and thermal fluid flow simulator. Energy Procedia, 4, 3290–3297.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. dePater, C.J. and Baisch, S.
    [2011] Geomechanical Study of Bowland Shale Seismicity, Synthesis Report, Cuadrilla Resources Ltd., p. 57.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Goertz-Allmann, B.P., Kühn, D., Oye, V., Bohloli, B. and Aker, E.
    [2014] Combining microseismic and geomechanical observations to interpret storage integrity at the In Salah CCS site. Geophys. J. Int., 198, 447–461.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Gray, D.H. and Rex, R.W.
    [1966] Formation damage in sandstones caused by clay dispersion and migration. Proceedings of the 14th National Conference on Clays and Clay minerals, Berkeley, USA, 355–366.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Houlsby, A.
    [1976] Routine Interpretation of the Lugeon Water-Test. Q. J. Eng. Geol., 9, 303–313.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Iding, M., Ringrose, P.
    [2010] Evaluating the impact of fractures on the performance of the In Salah CO2 storage site. Int J Greenh Gas Control4(2):242–248.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Javadpour, F. and Fisher, D.
    [2008] Nanotechnology-based micromodels and new image analysis to study transport in porous media: Journal of Canadian Petroleum Technology, 47(2), 30–37.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Oye, V., Aker, E., Daley, T.M., Kühn, D., Bohloli, B. and Korneev, V.
    [2012] Microseismic monitoring and interpretation of injection data from the In Salah CO2 storage site (Krechba), Algeria. Energy Procedia, 37, 4191–4198.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Quinones-Rozo, C.
    [2010] Lugeon test interpretation, revisited. In: Collaborative Management of Integrated Watersheds, US Society of Dams, 30th Annual Conference, 405–414.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Sokama-Neuyam, Y.A., Forsetløkken, S.L., LienJ.E. and UrsinJ.R.
    [2017] The Coupled Effect of Fines Mobilization and Salt Precipitation on CO2 Injectivity. Energies, 10(8), 1125, 18 p.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Shi, J. Q., Sinayuc, C., Durucan, S., and Korre, A.
    [2012] Assessment of carbon dioxide plume behaviour within the storage reservoir and the lower caprock around the KB-502 injection well at In Salah. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 7, 115–126.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Valdes, J.R. and Carlos Santamarina, J.
    [2006] Particle clogging in radial flow: Microscale mechanisms. SPE Journal, 193–198, SPE 88819.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. White, J.A., Chiaramonte, L., Ezzedine, S., Foxall, W., Hao, Y., Ramirez, A., and McNab, W.
    [2014] Geomechanical behavior of the reservoir and caprock system at the In Salah CO2 storage project. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111(24), 8747–8752.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201800057
Loading
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.201800057
Loading

Data & Media loading...

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