Gulf Coast Carbon CenterIndustry-Academic Research Partnership

Assessment of options for carbon capture and sequestrationin an area of large sources and large geologic capacity

Geologic Sequestration Emplaces Dense-Phase

CO2 in Pore Systems in Rock 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 dense-phase 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.

Who is the Gulf Coast Carbon Center?Who is the Gulf Coast Carbon Center?

New Members Sempra, Shell, TXU

Fayette Power Plant (LCRA/Austin Energy)

Industry Sponsors Hosted by:

Staff

Gulf Coast Carbon Center Collaborations

• DOE funded Southeast Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnership (SECARB) led by Southern States Energy Board– $4.9 M Phase II “Stacked Storage” = EOR+Brine

storage– $35M “early” demonstration with Denbury Resources

Cranfield Mississippi– Sponsored projects –SE US power companies

• DOE funded Southwest Regional Carbon Sequestration Partnership (SWCARB) led by New Mexico Tech– Project at SACROC hosted by KinderMorgen

GCCC Strategic Plan 2007-GCCC Strategic Plan 2007-20102010

GCCC Strategic Plan 2007-GCCC Strategic Plan 2007-20102010Goal 1: To educate the next generation of carbon

management professionals and regulatorsGoal 2: To develop selection criteria for commercial CO2 sequestration sitesGoal 3: To define an adequate and reliable monitoring and verification strategy applicable to long term storage Goal 4: Evaluation of sources risk and liability potentially associated with CO2 sequestrationGoal 5: Evaluation of economic potential of CO2 to enhance oil and gas recovery in the Gulf CoastGoal 6: Development of market framework and economic models for CO2 capture and storage in the Gulf CoastGoal 7: GCCC service and training to partners

Goal 1: Educate the Next Generation of Carbon Management Professionals and Regulators

• Support from Jackson School of Geosciences

• Student training

• Post-doc program

• Internships and visiting scientists– Rebekah Lee - Oxford University –public

acceptance survey

Goal 2: Develop Selection Criteria for Commercial CO2 Sequestration Sites

Goal 2: Develop Selection Criteria for Commercial CO2 Sequestration Sites

GASIFIER SITING (IGCC)

INPUTS OUTPUTS CO2 SINK INFRASTRUCTURE SUPPORT PERMITTING

FEEDSTOCK(AVAIL., TRANSP.

COSTS)TRANSPORTATION

DEMAND AND MARKET

GEOLOGIC CHAR.PUBLIC / PRIVATE

SUPPORT

AIR QUALITY

COMMITED CONTRACTS

WATER (AVAILABILITY, VOL.,

COST, QUALITY)

FINANCIAL INCENTIVES

TRANSMISSION LINES

PLANT SITE

INJECTION SITERIGHTS

GASIFIER SITING (IGCC)

INPUTS OUTPUTS CO2 SINK INFRASTRUCTURE SUPPORT PERMITTING

FEEDSTOCK(AVAIL., TRANSP.

COSTS)TRANSPORTATION

DEMAND AND MARKET

GEOLOGIC CHAR.PUBLIC / PRIVATE

SUPPORT

AIR QUALITY

COMMITED CONTRACTS

WATER (AVAILABILITY, VOL.,

COST, QUALITY)

FINANCIAL INCENTIVES

TRANSMISSION LINES

PLANT SITE

INJECTION SITERIGHTS

•Create a rigorous, comprehensive manual with pragmatic guidance in non-technical language on best practices for selecting a geologic sequestration site in brine-bearing formations (saline aquifers). •Guidance derived in part from assessments of sites for Texas FutureGen – two successful sites selected.

Objective 2.1: Guidance Manual

Vanessa Nunez and Mark Holtz

Objective 2.2: Reduce current uncertainty in estimates of the capacity of brine formations

for CO2 storage

Participation in DOE Regional Carbon Sequestration National Atlas

www.natcarb.org

Development of advanced methodsfor capacity assessment

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

0 250 500 750 1000

Time from Start of Injection (years)

To

tal W

ate

r F

lux

(M

m3 /y

r)

0

100

200

300

400

500

Inje

cti

on

Ra

te (

Mt

CO

2/y

r)

Injection rate

Total water flux at 30 km

Total water flux at 100 km

Storage in brine Storage in coal

Storage in oil and gasJeanPhillipe Nicot and

Srivatsan Lakasminisarihan

Rebecca Smyth

Options for Estimating Capacity

• Volumetric approach: Total pore volume x Efficiency factor (E)– Free CO2 volume in structural and stratigraphic traps– Trapped CO2 residual phase

• Volume dissolved• Volume that can be stored beneath an area

constrained by surface uses or by other unacceptable risks – well fields, faults

• Maximum pressure as a limit on capacity• Displaced water as a limit on capacity

Vol

umet

ricR

isk-

base

d

Effect of Depth of Formation in Storage Capacity

• Increased capacity with depth of formation almost entirely due to higher safe injection pressure

Vo

lum

e in

ject

ed/p

ore

vo

lum

e

Goal 3: Define an Adequate and Reliable Monitoring and Verification Strategy

Applicable to Long Term Storage

• Objective 3.1: Evaluate existing approaches for monitoring and verification of CO2 storage in brine formations by assessing sensitivity, accuracy and precision of tools relative to plausible leakage signals.

• Objective 3.2: To Develop and evaluate innovative technologies for “Early Warning” detection of CO2 leakage

• Objective 3.3: Test an innovative approach to monitoring and verification of CO2 storage by combining measurements of deformation with

geomechanical modeling.

Goal 3: Field Tests of Monitoring and Verification Technologies

Goal 3: Field Tests of Monitoring and Verification Technologies

Field project #2in process Cranfield

Proposed East TexasFutureGen Site

Proposed West TexasFutureGen Site

Frio Test Site

SACROC

Injection well

Observation well

Injection Well Observation Well

30 m

U-tubes

RST logs

Frio “Blue”

Sandstone

15m thick

Tubing hung seismic source

and hydrophones

Downhole P and T

Frio Brine Pilot near Houston TX

Early Warning Monitoring Options

• Atmosphere– Ultimate receptor but dynamic

• Biosphere– Assurance of no damage but

dynamic• Soil and Vadose Zone

– Integrator but dynamic• Aquifer and USDW

– Integrator, slightly isolated from ecological effects

• Above injection monitoring zone– First indicator, monitor small signals,

stable. • In injection zone - plume

– Oil-field type technologies. Will not identify small leaks

• In injection zone - outside plume– Assure lateral migration of CO2 and

brine is acceptable

Aquifer and USDW

Atmosphere

Biosphere

Vadose zone & soil

Seal

Seal

CO2 plume

Monitoring Zone

In-house software development for fault/fracturestability analysesAssessing Pressure and Tilt

tip

Goal 4: Evaluation of Sources Risk and Liability Potentially Associated with CO2

Sequestration• Objective 4.1: Write a primer based on literature review

on risk and liability potentially associated with CO2 sequestration in the Gulf Coast

• Objective 4.2: To develop a predictive ability to evaluate the risk of leakage of a seal for a brine formation during and after injection.

• Objective 4.2: Assess the effectiveness of “phase trapping” nonwetting-phase residual saturation in lowering leakage risk in long term under various injection conditions.

• Objective 4.3 Assess the risk of CO2 storage in brine reservoirs to the quality of fresh water resources

Non-wetting Residual Phase Trapping Mechanism

CaptureLand surface

> 800 m

Injection Zone

Seal = capillary or pressure barrier to flow

CO2

Risk to Underground Sources of Drinking Water

Capture Land surface

> 800 m

Underground Sources of Drinking Water

Injection Zone

CO2

HypothesizedBrine leak path

HypothesizedCO2 leak path

Preliminary Analysis of Risk to Drinking Water from CO2 leakage

U

-20

-10

0

10

20

30

0 2 4 6 8

Sample

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

Corrine Wong

Goal 5: Evaluation of Economic Potential of CO2 to Enhance Oil and Gas Recovery in the Gulf

Coast

• Objective 5.1: To create more accurate predictions of oil-production and CO2 usage for CO2 EOR floods in Gulf Coast clastic reservoirs

• Objective 5.2: Quantify the sequestration potential and feasibility of enhanced gas recovery potential for depleted gas reservoirs in Texas.

Simplified Model Using Dimensionless Groups for Rapid Assessment of CO2 Flooding and Storage in Gulf Coast

Reservoirs

• Model can be applied to candidate Gulf Coast reservoirs in BEG database – limited data on many reservoirs

• Potential for use by small and big operators alike to quickly identify best reservoirs

CO2 Injection and Production

0.00E+00

1.00E+09

2.00E+09

3.00E+09

4.00E+09

0 25 50 75 100 125

Time (days)

Volu

me

(SCF

)

Injected

Produced

Derek Wood, Larry Lake

Derek Woods Larry lake

Improving Economic Assessment (EOR)

Mark Holtz and others

QAc4748x

Cumulative production > 1 MMSTB

No

Rejected

Yes

No

Minimum miscibility

Pressure (depth, temperature, pressure, oil

character) Unknown

Rejected

Oil-reservoir data base

Reservoir depth

>6000 ftYes

Yes

No

Rejected

No

Rejected

Does reservoir have water-

drive mechanism?

Yes

Candidate reservoir

No

Has reservoir been

waterflooded?

Candidate for

secondary

recovery

Yes

BureauofEconomic

Geology

Bureau of Economic Geology

Decision Tree for Screening Candidate Reservoirs

Recovery Efficiency of Sandstone Reservoirs from Enhanced Oil Recovery Projects (1980’s)

Fre

qu

enc

y

Recovery efficiency (percent)

Submarine fan

Barrier/strandplain

Fluvial/deltaic

QAc4237c

0

2

3

4

0 6 12 18 24 30 36 42

1

5

6

7

17%, Little Creek, MS, Denbury (2004)

14.5 %, Paradis, LA, Texaco

Quarantine Bay, LA, Chevron

Single well huff ’n’ puff

Bureau of Economic Geology

CO2 sequestration capacity in miscible oil reservoirs along the Gulf Coast

Bureau of Economic Geology

Goal 6: Development of Market Framework and Economic Models for CO2 Capture and Storage

in the Gulf Coast

• Objective 6.1: Provide to the GCCC partners scenarios and analysis of the policy options under consideration at the State and Federal levels.

• Objective 6.2: To model possible evolutionary pathways for CO2 pipeline networks in the Gulf Coast and their impact on CO2 value chains

Model possible evolutionary pathways for CO2 pipeline networks in the Gulf Coast and their

impact on CO2 Value Chains

Assessment byJoseph Essandoh-YedduEnergy Commission, Ghana

Goal 7: GCCC Service and Training to Partners

• Training tailored to sponsor requests

• Public materials

• Specific data sets developed for sponsors

Workshop for operators

Gulf Coast Carbon Center

Gulf Coast Carbon Center

www.gulfcoastcarbon.org