| Source |
SPE International Conference on CO2 Capture, Storage, and Utilization,
10-12 November 2010,
New Orleans, Louisiana, USA
|
| Preview |
Abstract
Geologic storage of CO2 for atmospheric emissions reductions adds unique
requirements to document containment through monitoring. Monitoring pressure
stratigraphically above the injection interval has been proposed as a
fit-to-purpose technique to document performance of confining system and degree
of isolation provided by existing wellbore completions. To test the technique
under field conditions, data have been collected over a >24-month period
beginning in July 2008 during a continuous industrial-scale CO2 injection at an
enhanced oil recovery (EOR) site at Cranfield Field, Mississippi. Continuous
downhole high-precision pressure and temperature data were collected at a
single well at two depths: at the injection interval (3117 m) and at a selected
above zone monitoring interval (AZMI). The AZMI is a prevalent non-productive
~100mD sandstone 112 m above the injection zone and above a thick confining
system. These gauges monitor reservoir and above-zone pressure perturbations
related to activities at 7 injection wells, 9 production wells, as well as
potential contributions from other historic plugged and abandoned wells in the
vicinity. Static initial reservoir pressure conditions prior to any CO2
injection were similar to what would be encountered in typical sequestration
projects, so pressure evolution prior to significant fluid production is
representative of what may be expected in many sequestration scenarios into
brine formations. Many injection wells have been shut in during 2010, allowing
pressure decline similar to anticipated CCS project site closure to be
observed. Recent arrival (July 2010) of CO2 to the dedicated observation well
allows the pressure and temperature response in both the injection and AZMI to
be observed in the presence of CO2.
Three primary observations suggest that interformational communication at the
site due to large-volume CO2 injection is negligible: 1) A significant pressure
differential is sustained for the period of injection (currently over 2 years),
reaching a maximum of >8 MPa; 2) Temperature data do not indicate
significant fluid volumes moving from the injection interval to the AZMI in the
vicinity of the observation well; and 3) The pressure trends and transients
created in the injection interval by variable injection rates are not apparent
in the AZMI data. Observed pressure data are being used to constrain the
sensitivity of the technique for detecting inter-formational communication via
wellbores and geologic confining systems, and to determine possible scenarios
that can explain the dynamic but relatively minor observed AZMI pressure
changes. Interpretation challenges include engineering-related contributions to
the observed pressure signal related to the remediation and complex dual
completion of the 60 year old observation well. Engineering-related
contributions at the observation well appear to dominate the AZMI signal,
increasing noise and reducing the sensitivity of the technique for detecting
more subtle short-term dynamic (transient) pressure changes related to fluid
flux that are demonstrably observed in the injection interval.
Introduction
Large-volume injection of carbon dioxide (CO2) for sequestration in
subsurface geologic reservoirs will typically elevate subsurface reservoir
fluid pressure. The magnitude and duration of pressure elevation depends on the
rate/duration of injection and the geological properties of the reservoir and
surrounding stratigraphy, including any associated brine aquifer systems.
Elevated pressure provides energy for interformational communication, which
could include displacement of brine and CO2 out of the injection interval, and
propagation of pressure through the stratigraphy. Elevated pressure has the
potential to impact storage integrity1 and to cause long-term regional
environmental effects2,3. The concept of pressure management in the injection
interval via brine extraction has been discussed and could reduce the potential
for interformational communication, but does not negate the utility of pressure
and temperature monitoring as a surveillance tool for evaluating containment
during CCS projects.
|