Susan Hovorka Gulf Coast Carbon Center Bureau of Economic Geology

Bureau of Economic Geology

100 Years of Scientific Impact

CO2 – Too Much of a Good ThingCO2 – Too Much of a Good ThingUpdate on Gulf Coast Carbon Center Update on Gulf Coast Carbon Center Research on Geologic SequestrationResearch on Geologic Sequestration

Susan HovorkaGulf Coast Carbon Center





Gulf Coast Carbon Center (GCCC)

BEG Team Scott Tinker

Sue Hovorka Tip Meckel J. P. NicotIan Duncan

Rebecca SmythRamon Trevino

Katherine Romanak Changbing Yang

Dave Carr Vanessa Nunez

Jiemin LuJong Won Choi

Carey King students and others

LBNLLLNLORNLNETLSNLNew Mexico TechMississippi State UU of MississippiRPSEASECARBSWPUT-PGEUT- CIEEPUT- DoGSUT-LawUT- LBJ schoolBEG- CEEJSG - CEE

Collaborators IA sponsors

GCCC Strategic Plan 2007-GCCC Strategic Plan 2007-20102010

• Goal 1: Educate next carbon management generation

• Goal 2: Develop commercial CO2 site selection criteria

• Goal 3: Define adequate monitoring / verification strategy

• Goal 4: Evaluate potential risk and liability sources

• Goal 5: Evaluate Gulf Coast CO2 EOR economic potential

• Goal 6: Develop Gulf Coast CCS market framework / economic models

• Goal 7: GCCC service and training to partners

www.gulfcoastcarbon.org

CO2 Increasing in the Atmosphere

• CO2 is produced by burning fossil fuels

• CO2 has been building up in the atmosphere during the industrial revolution

• As more people world-wide improve their standard of living, the amount of CO2 released will increase, causing additional build-up in the atmosphere

Keeling Curve Scripts Institute

Pollution in the Atmosphere

Effect Risk Chemical Solution

Global warming

Temperature

Ocean Acidification

CO2

[H2O, CH4 etc]

??

Ozone UV radiation

Health

PFC NOx

SOx

Change industrial practices

Acid rain Ecosystem SOx Stack precipitation

Is the Greenhouse Effect Bad?

This is Montana 80 my ago

This is Montana14,000 years ago

Risks from CO2 build-up in the Atmosphere

Recent increase in average global temperature

• CO2 is one of the greenhouse gases that control how much of the solar energy that hits the Earth is retained as heat.

• Higher atmospheric concentrations of CO2 will force the climate toward warmer average global conditions.

• Increased CO2 is causing the ocean surface waters to become more acidic

How can 0.3% of gas matter?

…Effects of increased CO2 in the atmosphere..

Where Do CO2 Emissions Come from?

Chemistry of Burning

Options to Reduce CO2 in the Atmosphere

• Conservation and energy efficiency• Fuel switching—e.g., natural gas for coal • Alternative energy—e.g., wind, solar, nuclear• Terrestrial sequestration—e.g., rainforest preservation, tree farms,

no-till farming.• Ocean disposal• Mineral sequestration• Geologic sequestration• “Novel concepts”

Which Is Best?To reduce the large volumes of CO2 that are now and will be in the future

released to the atmosphere, multiple options must be brought to maturation.

What is Geologic Sequestration?To reduce CO2 emissionsto air from point sources..

Carbon extractedfrom a coal or otherfossil fuel…

is currently burned and emitted to air

CO2 is captured as concentratedhigh pressure fluid by one of severalmethods..

CO2 is shipped as supercritical fluid via pipeline to a selected, permitted injection site

CO2 injected at pressure intopore space at depths below and isolated (sequestered)from potable water.

CO2 stored in pore space over geologicallysignificant time frames.

Capture Land surface

> 800 m

Underground Sources of Drinking Water

Injection Zone

CO2

Confining system limits CO2 rise

Injection zone Brine displaced

Pore-scale trapping

Characterization shows where and how CO2 will be stored



Policy questions for which geotechnical data are needed


• Are subsurface volumes are adequate to sequester the volumes needed to impact

atmospheric concentrations?

• Is storage security adequate to avoid inducing hazards and to benefit atmospheric

concentrations? How do we know?

• How does CO2 Enhanced Oil Recovery fit carbon emissions reduction?



Power PlantsPure CO2 sourcesOil and Gas (USGS)Coal (USGS)Brine Aquifer> 1000m

Compiled 2000 from USGS data

Subsurface volumes near CO2 sources



DOE NATCARB Atlas

US current annual CO2 emissions 7 billion metric tonsEstimated US storage volume 3,600 billion metric tons

Saline aquifer

http://www.netl.doe.gov/technologies/carbon_seq/refshelf/atlas/



Assessing Adequacy of Subsurface Storage Volumes

• CO2 non-ideal gas: at depths >800 m dense phase 0.6g/cc and compressibility decreases

• Subsurface pore volumeV= A x H x phi

• Efficiency of volume occupied– Residual water– Sweep efficiency– Pressure limits– Water displacement

• Economic and risk factors– Resources –water - & gas– Unacceptable risks– Other “no-go” areas– Cost

Experiment Hypothesis

• CO2 can be injected safely with no risk to health, safety or the ecosystem

• We will be able to measure the distribution of CO2 in the subsurface

• We will be able to model the distribution of CO2 in the subsurface using computer simulation

• Public an industry confidence will increase

Experimental tests Theoretical Approaches Through CommercializationT

heo

ryan

d l

abF

ield

ex

per

imen

tsH

ypo

thes

is

test

ed

Commercial Deployment by Southern Co.

CO2 retained in-zone- document no leakage to air-no damage to water

CO2 saturation correctly predicted by flow

modeling

Pressure (flow plus deformation)

correctly predicted by model

Above-zone acoustic monitoring (CASSM) & pressure monitoring

Contingency planParsimonious public

assurance monitoringTo

wa

rd

com

mer

cia-

liza

tio

n

Surface monitoring: instrument verificationGroundwater programCO2 variation over time

Subsurface perturbation predicted

Sensitivity of tools; saturated-vadose

modeling of flux and tracers

CO2 saturation measured through time – acoustic

impedance + conductivityTomography and change

through time

Tilt, microcosmic, pressure mapping

3- D time lapse surface/ VSP seismic

Acoustic response to pressure change over

time

Dissolution and saturation measured via tracer breakthrough and chromatography

Lab-based core response to EM and acoustic under various saturations, tracer

behavior

Advanced simulation of reservoir pressure field



GCCC Field Tests for Monitoring and Verification Technologies - DOE-NETL and Industry Hosts

CranfieldSECARB Phase II&III

Denbury

Frio Test Texas American Resources

SACROCSouthwestPartnershipKinderMorganNM Tech –U Utah



Adequacy of Storage Security -Perceived Risks

Speculation about risks from geologic sequestration of CO2 has been dominated by concerns such as:

• Escape leading to asphyxiation

• Escape leading to toxicity of drinking water

• Induced earthquakes



Perceived risk: CO2 escape leading to asphyxiation

“CO2 releases are deadly for communities:”

“….If the gases leak out they are deadly to all living creatures since CO2 is lighter than air, and displaces air. When the gases are released they stay close to the ground, displace oxygen, and suffocate everything in its path. Two events in the relative recent history of CO2 emissions from natural sources underscore the community health hazard created if CO2 were to escape from sequestration:

The largest recent disaster caused by a large CO2 release from a lake occurred in 1986, in Cameroon, central Africa. A volcanic crater-lake known as Nyos belched bubbles of CO2 into the still night air and the gas settled around the lake's shore, where it killed 1800 people and countless thousands of animals.

The 15 August 1984 gas release at Lake Monoun that killed 37 people (Sigurdsson and others, 1987) was attributed to a rapid overturn of lake water with CO2 that had been at the bottom coming to the surface, triggered by an earthquake and landslide. The emission of around 1 cubic kilometer of CO2 devastated a local village and killed animals for miles.

Environmental Justice objection to CA AB 705 Letter* to Assembly member Hancock, April, 2008(emphasis mine)



Risk Myth Explained: escape will not lead to asphyxiation

• CO2 is a well known confined space risk – CO2 is 1/3 denser than air (N2 and O2) therefore will effectively displace air from a tank, mine, cave, or crater.

• Air and CO2 are miscible with no viscosity contrast, so CO2 rapidly disperses in an open setting, on a slope, with breeze or circulation.

Frio Brine Pilot

• Injection of CO2 into brine-bearing sandstone

• Seals numerous thick shales, small fault block

• Depth 5000 ft

Injection interval

Oil production

Injection Simulation



Documenting permanence of residual trapping CO2 Saturation Observed with Cross-well Seismic

Tomography vs. Modeled

Tom Daley and Christine Doughty LBNL



Saturation logging observation well to measurechanges in CO2 saturation – match to model

Shinichi Sakurai, Jeff Kane, Christine Doughty

LithologyV/V0 1

5010

5020

5030

5040

5050

5000

DEPTHFEET

RST gas sat.V/V1 0

Model gas sat.V/V1 0

RST gas sat.V/V1 0

V/V1 0

RST gas sat.V/V1 0

V/V1 0

RST gas sat.V/V1 0

V/V1 0

RST gas sat.V/V1 0

V/V1 0

RST gas sat.V/V1 0

Log porosityV/V0.4 0

Model porosityV/V0.4 0

Model permmD10000 1

Day 4 Day 10 Day 29 Day 69 Day 142 Day 474Model gas sat. Model gas sat. Model gas sat. Model gas sat.

What does injection underground look like?



Topography or wind will cause CO2 to spread and mix

Oldenburg and Unger, 2004, Vadose Zone Journal 3:848-857

No danger

Cool CO2 pooling on the ground in the still night air but at low concentrations Frio brine pilot, Houston, TX –No Danger



Perceived Risk: escape leading to toxicity of drinking water

• “Carbon Sequestration….– Will require transformation of CO2 gas to CO2 liquid

which is acidic

– CO2 liquid’s acid nature is corrosive to the underground environment, contaminating the ground and would eventually leach to the surface.

– When CO2 leaches up to the surface, it will contaminate underground fresh drinking water aquifers, lakes, rivers, and the ocean”

Excerpts from “Carbon Sequestration Public Health and Environmental Dangers”Researched by Coalition For a Safe Environment Emphasis added`



Risk Myth Explained: CO2 dissolved in aquifers has little ability to damage

water qualityCO2 dissolves in water = dissolution trapping

CO2(g) + H2O ↔ H2CO3(aq) H2CO3(aq) ↔ HCO3(aq)– + H+

HCO3(aq)– ↔ CO3(aq)-– + H+(aq) Acid= tang in carbonated water

Acid is buffered by rocksincrease Ca, Mg, Fe, Na, Si, CO3, SO4, etc. in solution

What could the etc. be?Mn, As, Pb, Sr, Ni, Zn, Ag, U, Ni, Cd……

So would leaked CO2 be a risk to drinking water?



Carbonated water…

Otherwise known as sparkling water. Has variable mineral content but is potable



0.01

0.10

1.00

10.00

100.00

1000.00

10000.00

100000.00

1000000.00

20-Mar 22-Mar 24-Mar 26-Mar 28-Mar 30-Mar 1-Apr 3-Apr 5-Apr 7-Apr 9-Apr 11-Apr 13-Apr 15-Apr 17-Apr

pp

b

Al

B

Ba

Ca

K

Mg

Si

Sr

Mn

Na

Rb

Cs

Fe

Li

Mo

Ni

Se

U

V

Results of adding CO2 to aquifer system

• Add CO2 to typical aquifer rocks + fresh water – increase in dissolved minerals – proportional to constituents already in water.

• No damage to fresh water from 37 years of CO2 EOR at SACROC

Normal water Add CO2

GCCC staff Rebecca Smyth, KatherineJiemin Lu, Changbing Yang

Is CO2 dangerous?



Perceived Risk: Injection causing earthquakes

• In the first Superman movie, supervillain Lex Luthor plans to trigger a massive, California-detaching earthquake by detonating a couple of nuclear weapons in the San Andreas Fault.

• Crazy Lex! That scheme never would have worked, geologists will tell you. But, if he'd been serious about creating an earthquake, there are ways he could have actually done it. He would just have to inject some liquid (as some carbon-sequestration schemes propose) deep into the Earth's crust, or bore a few hundred thousand tons of coal out of a mountain.

• "In the past, people never thought that human activity could have such a big impact, but it can," said Christian Klose, a geohazards researcher at Columbia's Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory.

• It turns out, actually, that the human production of earthquakes is hardly supervillain-worthy. It's downright commonplace: Klose estimates that 25 percent of Britain's recorded seismic events were caused by people.

• Most of these human-caused quakes are tiny, registering less than four on geologist's seismic scales. These window-rattlers don't occur along natural faults, and wouldn't have happened without human activity -- like mining tons of coal or potash. They occur when a mine's roof collapses, for example, as in the Crandall Canyon collapse in Utah that killed a half-dozen miners last year.

http://blog.wired.com/wiredscience/2008/06/top-5-ways-that.htmlEmphasis added



Update on Results of SECARB Test of Monitoring Large Volume Injection at Cranfield

Natchez Mississippi

Mississippi River

3,000 m depthGas cap, oil ring, downdip water legShut in since 1965Strong water driveReturned to near initial pressure

Illustration by Tip Meckel



DAS MonitoringInjectorCFU 31F1

Obs CFU 31 F2

Obs CFU 31 F3

Above-zone

monitoringF1 F2 F3

Injection Zone

Above Zone Monitoring

10,500 feet BSL

Closely spaced well array to examine flow in complex reservoir

68m

112 m

Petrel model Tip Meckel



Start injection at DAS Dec 1, 2009 175 kg/min step up to 520 kg/min

Bot

tom

hol

e pr

essu

re

Elapsed time

Dec 1

400

bar

340

psi

Injector BHP

Observation well BHP

It’s all about pressure



Risk Myth Explained: Limiting injection pressure to avoid earthquakes

• Injection is used to cause “frac jobs” -- for reservoir stimulation. The pressure requirements are calculated, testable, and well documented.

• MASIP = Maximum Allowable Surface Injection Pressure is a main regulation of current EPA underground injection control program.

• Risk of accidental earthquake can be avoided by regulations in place. Pressure (psi)0 1,000

Dep

th (

ft)

0

10,000

Lithostatic gradient

Hydrostatic gradient

Maximum pressure increase



Substantive Risk- Damage to fresh water resulting from brine water

leakage

Injection well

Plume of injected CO2

Footprint of area over CO2

1

Footprint of area of elevated pressure

2

Damage to fresh water by salinization by water expelled during injection.

Managed in Underground Injection Control by assuring that well are plugged in area of review



ConclusionsConclusions

• Subsurface volumes are adequate to sequester the volumes needed to impact atmospheric concentrations

• Using available technology, adequate storage security can be assured to avoid inducing hazards and to benefit atmospheric concentrations

CO2 Sequestration Capacity in Miscible Oil Reservoirs along the Gulf Coast


Mark Holtz 2005NATCARB Atlas 2007

Estimated annual regional point source CO2 emissions

Stacked Storage in Gulf Coast

Near-term and long-term sources andNear and long-term sinks linked regionally in a pipeline network

Enhanced oil productionto offset development cost and speed implementation

Very large volumestorage in stacked brineformations beneathreservoir footprints



DAS

A B

3D Denbury - interpretation Tip Meckel BEG

Characterization of the Reservoir T

usc

alo

osa

Fm

Tuscaloosa D-E reservoir

Oil-water contactBased on log annotation and recent side-walls

Tuscaloosa confining system

Phase II

More Information

• http://www.epa.gov/globalwarming/

• http://ww2010.atmos.uiuc.edu

• http://www.ieagreen.org.uk

• http://www.ieagreen.org.uk/ghgs.htm

www.beg.utexas.edu/co2



Geologic Sequestrationof Carbon – Put it back

Carbon extractedfrom coal or otherfossil fuel…

Returned into the earthwhere it came from

Susan Hovorka Gulf Coast Carbon Center Bureau of Economic Geology

Documents

Transcript of Susan Hovorka Gulf Coast Carbon Center Bureau of Economic Geology