1887

Abstract

Summary

CO Lock Corp. is developing a novel climate solution through in-situ mineralization of carbon dioxide in brucite-rich ultramafic formations. Its flagship site, Sam, located in British Columbia (Canada), leverages the high reactivity of brucite to permanently convert injected CO into stable carbonate minerals. To inform site development, a high-resolution Towed Transient Electromagnetic (tTEM) survey was conducted across the property. This rapid, ground-based resistivity method produced dense geoelectrical imaging of the shallow subsurface, helping to identify fracture networks and competent lithologies. These insights supported the selection of drilling targets and informed preliminary injection zone planning.

The upcoming pilot will involve injecting CO-saturated water into identified fracture zones to test mineralization efficiency. A comprehensive Monitoring, Reporting, and Verification (MRV) framework will be deployed to ensure scientific rigor and traceability. It integrates geophysical, geochemical, and hydrogeological methods to monitor fluid movement, track mineralization progress, and validate permanent CO storage.

Together, these tools serve dual purposes: optimizing injection design and verifying carbonate formation. The strategy positions the Sam site as a scientifically robust, scalable model for CO sequestration, advancing CO Lock’s mission of transparent, permanent, and verifiable climate solutions.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.202585022
2025-10-21
2026-01-15
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Bergmann, P., Diersch, M., Götz, J., Ivandić, M., Ivanova, A., Juhlin, C., Kummerow, J., Liebscher, A., Lüth, S., Meekes, S., Norden, B., Schmidt‑Hattenberger, C., Wagner, F. M., & Zhang, F. (2016). Review on geophysical monitoring of CO2 injection at Ketzin, Germany. Journal of Petroleum Science and Engineering, 139, 112–136.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Fabriola, H., Bitria, A., Bourgeois, B., Delatre, M., Girard, J. F., Pajot, G., & Rohmer, J. (2011). Geophysical methods for CO2 plume imaging: Comparison of performances. Energy Procedia, 4, 3604–3611.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Erkan, K. (2008). A comparative overview of geophysical methods. The Ohio State University.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Ma, J. F., Li, L., Wang, H. F., Tan, M. Y., Cui, S. L., Zhang, Y. Y., Qu, Z. P., Jia, L. Y., & Zhang, S. H. (2016). Geophysical monitoring technology for CO2 sequestration. Applied Geophysics, 13(2), 288–306.
    [Google Scholar]
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.202585022
Loading
/content/papers/10.3997/2214-4609.202585022
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