1887

Abstract

Summary

Underground Hydrogen Storage (UHS) in depleted hydrocarbon reservoirs is receiving heightened interest as a feasible method for large-scale hydrogen energy storage, essential for facilitating the global shift to cleaner energy sources. Nonetheless, a fundamental difficulty related to UHS is hydrogen’s high diffusion coefficient, which can promote substantial hydrogen (H) loss through the caprock. This issue is especially significant in reservoirs with limited thickness caprocks, where H2 can quickly penetrate adjacent top formations, thus undermining the integrity of the storage. This study formulates a compositional model to estimate the quantity of H that can diffuse via thin caprock layers. The equations are solved analytically, account for H2 plume area, gas saturation, H2 concentration, caprock porosity and thickness, diffusion coefficient, chemical potential, reservoir pressure and temperature, and give the distribution of H2 in the caprock and total loss as a function of time. The analytical solution is validated by a series of ID numerical simulations and subsequently used to predict and compare diffusive leakage in a 3D reservoir model (Nome field).

Prior to hydrogen breakthrough above the caprock, H2 diffusion within the caprock resembles diffusion in a semi-infinite medium. Under this circumstance, the H2 loss (moles diffused from reservoir into caprock) is directly proportional to the square root of the diffusion coefficient and time. Upon breakthrough of H2 into the upper formation, H2 in the upper formation floats due to buoyancy. This results in a permanent low H2 concentration at the caprock-upper formation boundary, and the H2 loss through the caprock enters a steady-state with constant loss rate and a linear relationship with the diffusion coefficient and time. The analytical solution exhibits significant concordance with the 1D numerical simulation results, illustrating its reliability in forecasting H2 diffusion behavior across various caprock conditions. Accordingly, we quantify the loss of H2 through the caprock compared to the stored amount, and use this to formulate a screening criterion for acceptable caprock properties, especially considering the caprock thickness.

Additional sensitivity analysis indicates that thinner caprocks with elevated diffusion coefficients undergo more rapid breakthrough and increased total H2 losses. The comparison between the analytical solution and 3D numerical simulations demonstrate rapid and accurate assessments of diffusive H2 loss through the caprock in 3D reservoirs. The study suggests that proper caprock characterization is essential for ensuring adequate estimation of H2 loss through caprocks via diffusion.

© EAGE Publications BV
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.202531032
2025-04-02
2026-02-15

  • From This Site

    /content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.202531032
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    10
    5
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Alafnan, S. (2024). Factors influencing hydrogen migration in cap rocks: Establishing new screening criteria for the selection of underground hydrogen storage locations. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 83, 1099–1106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhvdene.2024.08.179
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Aminu, M. D., Nabavi, S. A., Rochelle, C. A., & Manovic, V. (2017). A review of developments in carbon dioxide storage. Applied Energy, 208, 1389–1419. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2017.09.015
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Amiri, B., Andersen, P.Ø., Ghaedi, M., & Luo, X. (2024). Investigation of Synergy Between Extended Oil Recovery and Hydrogen Storage in a Producing Field Using the Nome Reservoir ModelSPE Norway Subsurface Conference, https://doi.org/10.2118/218453-MS
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Andersen, P.Ø. (2023a). Early- and Late-Time Prediction of Counter-Current Spontaneous Imbibition, Scaling Analysis and Estimation of the Capillary Diffusion Coefficient. Transport in Porous Media, 147(3), 573–604. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11242-023-01924-6
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Andersen, P.Ø. (2023b). Insights from Boltzmann transformation in solving 1D counter-current spontaneous imbibition at early and late time. Advances in Geo-Energy Research, 7(3), 164–175. https://doi.org/10.46690/ager.2023.03.03
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Aslannezhad, M., Ali, M., Kalantariasl, A., Sayyafzadeh, M., You, Z., Iglauer, S., & Keshavarz, A. (2023). A review of hydrogen/rock/brine interaction: Implications for Hydrogen Geo-storage. Progress in Energy and Combustion Science, 95, 101066. https://doi.org/10.1016/i.pecs.2022.101066
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Caglayan, D. G., Weber, N., Heinrichs, H. U., Linβen, J., Robinius, M., Kukla, P. A., & Stolten, D. (2020). Technical potential of salt caverns for hydrogen storage in Europe. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 45(11), 6793–6805. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhvdene.2019.12.161
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Crank, J. (1979). The mathematics of diffusion. Oxford university press.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. Equinor. (2018). Nome Benchmark Model (https://github.com/OPM/opm-data/tree/master/norne
     [Google Scholar]
  10. GeoQuest. (2022). ECLIPSE Reference Manual. SLB.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Ghaedi, M., Andersen, P.Ø., & Gholami, R. (2023). Hydrogen diffusion into caprock: A semi-analytical solution and a hydrogen loss criterion. Journal of Energy Storage, 64, 107134. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.est.2023.107134
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Gregory, S. P., Barnett, M. J., Field, L. P., & Milodowski, A. E. (2019). Subsurface Microbial Hydrogen Cycling: Natural Occurrence and Implications for Industry. Microorganisms, 7(2).
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Heinemann, N, Alcalde, J., Miocic, J. M., Hangx, S. J. T, Kallmeyer, J., Ostertag-Henning, C., Hassanpouryouzband, A., Thaysen, E. M., Strobel, G J., Schmidt-Hattenberger, C., Edlmann, K., Wilkinson, M., Bentham, M., Stuart Haszeldine, R., Carbonell, R, & Rudloff, A. (2021). Enabling large-scale hydrogen storage in porous media - the scientific challenges [10.1039/D0EE03536J]. Energy & Environmental Science, 14(2), 853–864. https://doi.org/10.1039/D0EE03536J
     [Google Scholar]
  14. IEA. (2019). The Future of Hydrogen. IEA. https://www.iea.org/reports/the-future-of-hydrogen
     [Google Scholar]
  15. IEA. (2021). Net Zero by 2050. IEA. https://www.iea.org/reports/net-zero-by-2050
     [Google Scholar]
  16. Kim, C., Devegowda, D., Dang, S.T, & Mehana, M. (2025). Modeling the diffusivity of hydrogen and the associated cushion gas in depleted hydrocarbon reservoir caprocks. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 105, 248–257. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhvdene.2025.01.063
     [Google Scholar]
  17. Kivi, I. R., Makhnenko, R. Y., & Vilarrasa, V. (2022). Two-Phase Flow Mechanisms Controlling CO2 Intrusion into Shaly Caprock. Transport in Porous Media, 141(3), 771–798. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11242-022-01748-w
     [Google Scholar]
  18. Leythaeuser, D., Schaefer, R. G., & Yukler, A. (1982). Role of Diffusion in Primary Migration of Hydrocarbons 1. AAPG Bulletin, 66(4), 408–429. https://doi.org/10.1306/03B59B2A-16D1-11D7-8645000102C1865D
     [Google Scholar]
  19. Leythaeuser, D., Schaefer, R. G., & Yukler, A. (1980). Diffusion of light hydrocarbons through near-surface rocks. Nature, 284(5756), 522–525. https://doi.org/10.1038/284522a0
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Lindeberg, E., & Bergmo, P. (2003). - The Long-Term Fate of CO2 Injected into an Aquifer. In J. Gale & Y. Kaya (Eds.), Greenhouse Gas Control Technologies - 6th International Conference (pp. 489–494). Pergamon. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-008044276-1/50078-7
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Liu, J., Wang, S., Javadpour, F., Feng, Q., & Cha, L. (2022). Hydrogen Diffusion in Clay Slit: Implications for the Geological Storage. Energy & Fuels, 36(14), 7651–7660. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.energyfuels.2c01189
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Navaid, H. B., Emadi, H, & Watson, M. (2023). A comprehensive literature review on the challenges associated with underground hydrogen storage. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 48(28), 10603–10635. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhvdene.2022.11.225
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Poling, B. E., Prausnitz, J. M., & O'Connell, J. P. (2001). Properties of Gases and Liquids (5th Edition ed.). McGraw-Hill Education. https://www.accessengineeringlibrary.com/content/book/9780070116825
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Raza, A., Arif, M., Glatz, G, Mahmoud, M., Al Kobaisi, M., Alafnan, S., & Iglauer, S. (2022). A holistic overview of underground hydrogen storage: Influencing factors, current understanding, and outlook. Fuel, 330, 125636. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2022.125636
     [Google Scholar]
  25. Scherer, G W., & Huet, B. (2009). Carbonation of wellbore cement by CO2 diffusion from caprock. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 3(6), 731–735. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2009.08.002
     [Google Scholar]
  26. SLB. (2022a). Eclipse 300. In Eclipse Simulators https://www.software.slb.com/products/eclipse/simulators
     [Google Scholar]
  27. SLB. (2022b). Petrel Subsurface Software. In https://www.slb.com/products-and-services/delivering-digital-at-scale/software/petrel-subsurf ace-software/petrel
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Tarkowski, R. (2019). Underground hydrogen storage: Characteristics and prospects. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 105, 86–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2019.01.051
     [Google Scholar]
  29. Zeng, L., Vialle, S., Ennis-King, J., Esteban, L., Sarmadivaleh, M., Sarout, J., Dautriat, J., Giwelli, A., & Xie, Q. (2023). Role of geochemical reactions on caprock integrity during underground hydrogen storage. Journal of Energy Storage, 65, 107414. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.est.2023.107414
     [Google Scholar]
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.202531032
Loading
Analytical Estimation of Caprock Diffusive Losses During Underground Hydrogen Storage – Caprock Screening Criteria
Conference Proceedings 2025, 1 (2025); https://doi.org/10.3997/2214-4609.202531032
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.202531032
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.202531032
Loading

Data & Media loading...

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