1887

Abstract

Summary

Permanent carbon storage relies on detailed subsurface characterization and subsequent dynamic modeling to predict plume and pressure geometries. In this study, Schlumberger evaluated carbon storage feasibility in the Los Angeles Basin using proven geomodelling and simulation workflows in Petrel and Eclipse. Specific geologic criteria must be present in the subsurface to achieve permanent storage. A saline sand formation with appropriate injectivity properties exists, is thick enough to ensure sufficient storage capacity, and is deep enough to store CO2 in a super critical state (800 m). An overlying shale formation must exist regionally to confine injected CO2. Once these criteria were met, leakage pathways and other subsurface risks were considered. For the purpose of this study a geocellular facies model was created from public and raster log well data to calculate storage capacity and identify five prospective storage site locations. Evaluation criteria such as fault leakage and reactivation, distance to subsurface operations, and reservoir storage potential were used to rank prospective locations. After identifying the most feasible proposed location, Eclipse dynamic modeling was performed using an injection rate of 1 million tons CO2/year over 20 years plus 50 years post injection to predict carbon plume migration and stabilization.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.202021024
2020-11-16
2024-04-24
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. CalGEMS
    CalGEMS. [2020]. Well Finder. Retrieved from https://maps.conservation.ca.gov/doggr/wellfinder/#/
    [Google Scholar]
  2. California Geological Survey.
    California Geological Survey. [2006]. An overview of Geologic Carbon Sequestration Potential in California.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Chavez, J. A.
    [2015, May]. Principal Stress Analysis of Rock Fracture Data from the Long Beach Oil Field, Los Angeles Basin, California. Long Beach, California, USA.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. DOE.
    DOE. [2015]. Carbon Atlas - Fifth Edition. NETL, Department of Energy. Retrieved from https://www.netl.doe.gov/coal/carbon-storage/strategic-program-support/natcarb-atlas
    [Google Scholar]
  5. DOGGR.
    DOGGR. [1992]. CALIFORNIA OIL & GAS FIELDS Volumes I, II, & III .
    [Google Scholar]
  6. EPA.
    EPA. [2018]. Geologic Sequestration of Carbon Dioxide Underground Injection Control [UIC] Program Class VI Implementation Manual for UIC Program Directors. Retrieved from https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2018-01/documents/implementation_manual_508_010318.pdf
    [Google Scholar]
  7. IHS.
    IHS. [2020]. Retrieved from https://my.ihs.com/energy
  8. Span, & Wagner.
    Span, & Wagner. [1996]. PSU Earth and Mineral Sciences Energy Institute CO2 Calculator. Retrieved from http://www.energy.psu.edu/tools/CO2-EOS/
    [Google Scholar]
  9. USGS.
    USGS. [2018]. Data analyzed for the preliminary prioritization of California oil and gas fields for regional groundwater monitoring. USGS. Retrieved from https://www.sciencebase.gov/catalog/item/57a50b81e4b0ebae89b6d877
    [Google Scholar]
  10. USGS.
    USGS. [2019]. Retrieved fromhttps://mrdata.usgs.gov/geology/state/state.php?state=CA
    [Google Scholar]
  11. USGS.
    USGS. [2019]. Earthquake Hazards Program. Retrieved from https://earthquake.usgs.gov/
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Wright.
    Wright. [1991]. Active Margin Basins Chapter 3 Structural Gelogy and Tectonic Evolution of the Los Angeles Basin. American Association of Petroleum Geologists.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.202021024
Loading
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.202021024
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