Overview of USGS Carbon Sequestration – Geologic Research

and Assessments Project

December, 2016

U.S. Geological Survey

Department of the Interior

Peter D. Warwick and the Geologic CO2 Sequestration Project Team

1

Outline for Presentation

• U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) carbon sequestration Congressional mandate

• Why is geologic CO2 sequestration important?

• What is the USGS geologic carbon sequestration project doing to address CO2 storage?

• Summary of take-away points

2

Carbon Sequestration Mandate

• The USGS Carbon Sequestration Program is funded by the USGS Climate and Land Use Change (CLU) Mission Area.

• The Carbon Sequestration Program is responsive to The Energy

Independence and Security Act (EISA) of 2007 (P.L. 110-140) which calls for the USGS to develop a methodology for, and then complete a national assessment of, the geologic storage capacity for CO2, and to evaluate associated geologic risks.

• EISA also directed the USGS to conduct a national assessment to quantify

the amount of carbon stored in ecosystems, the capacity of ecosystems to sequester carbon and the rate of greenhouse gas flux in and out of ecosystems (biologic carbon sequestration).

3

Why is geologic CO2 sequestration important?

Geologic storage of CO2 is essential to meet future CO2 emission reduction scenarios

• By 2050, carbon capture and geologic storage (CCS) should contribute about 14% of total emission reductions through 2050 in the 2° C Scenario (International Energy Agency, 2012, 2013)

4

Carbon capture and storage (CCS) contributes 14% of total emission reductions through 2050 in 2° C Scenario compared to 6° C Scenario

IEA (2013) Technology Roadmap Energy Technology Perspectives Carbon capture and storage IEA (2012) Energy Technology Perspectives 2012

60

50

40

30

0

20

10

Emis

sio

ns

(GtC

O2)

2009 2020 2040 2030 2050

Carbon capture & geologic storage 14% (~7-10 Gt CO2/yr)

Power generation efficiency & fuel switching 3%

Renewables 21%

Nuclear 8%

End use fuel switching 12%

End-use fuel and electricity efficiency 42%

2° C, 450 ppm

6° C

Year

1.5° C ?

5

USGS National Assessment of

Geologic Carbon Dioxide Storage

Resources mean = 3,000 Gt CO2 storage

U.S. Geological Survey Geologic Carbon Dioxide Storage Resources Assessment Team (2013)

The regions with the largest technically accessible storage resources (circled) are the Coastal Plains (mostly in the U.S. Gulf Coast), Rocky Mountains and Northern Great Plains, and Alaska (mostly North Slope)

Gt = metric gigaton

USGS estimates of technically accessible storage resources for CO2 in the United States by region

6

Source: Litynski (2015)

(Industrial Carbon Capture and Storage)

IGCC = Integrated gasification combined cycle EOR = enhanced oil recovery MTPY = million tons per year; DOE = U.S. Department of Energy

Examples of major U.S. CCS projects

7

Source: Litynski (2015)

Example of a large U.S. CCS project

8

The following slides illustrate major focus areas for the USGS Carbon Sequestration – Geologic Research and Assessments Project

9

What happens when you pump carbon dioxide underground?

Major questions addressed by USGS research: How much CO2 can be stored underground nationwide?

How much oil can be produced by injecting CO2 into reservoirs for enhanced oil recovery?

What are the environmental risks of storing CO2 in underground reservoirs? What is the potential for CO2 leakage, impacts to drinking water, and induced seismicity?

CO2 injection well in Mississippi

The USGS is monitoring induced seismicity at the Arthur Daniels Midland industrial carbon dioxide injection project in Decatur, IL.

10

Methodology Development and Assessment of National CO2 Enhanced Oil Recovery and Associated CO2 Storage Potential

Source: Global CCS Institute (2015)

The USGS has developed an assessment methodology for estimating the potential incremental technically recoverable oil resources resulting from CO2-enhanced oil recovery (CO2-EOR) in reservoirs with appropriate depth, pressure, and oil composition. The methodology also includes a procedure for estimating the CO2 that remains in the reservoir after the CO2-EOR process is complete (Warwick and others, in press)

11

• CO2 density and geothermal gradient research

• Underpressure in the basins of the Great Plains

Geological studies of reservoirs and seals in selected basins with high potential for CO2

storage

Nelson and others (2015)

Michigan Basin (Buursink, 2014) 12

• Geochemist’s Workbench software package for modeling geochemical systems

• TOUGH2-ECO2N reservoir geochemical-reaction modeling software

• This study aims to combine the modeling capabilities of these two software programs by using the newly developed re-entrant self-linking software object, ChemPlugin

• Collaborative research effort that includes the USGS, University of South Florida, Illinois State Geological Survey, and Aqueous Solutions, LLC (developers of The Geochemist’s Workbench and ChemPlugin).

Modeling Supercritical CO2 Migration and Geochemical Reactions in Saline Reservoirs

13

Natural CO2 reservoirs as analogues for CO2 storage

• Use natural CO2 reservoirs to investigate potential leakage risk and rates along faults and through breached seals

• Evaluate availability of natural CO2 resources that will

compete with anthropogenic CO2 for use in enhanced oil recovery – Study natural gas isotope geochemistry (including noble gases)

– Build geochemical database and characterize the size, timing and migration of natural accumulations within total CO2 systems

– Work with USGS Produced Waters Project by evaluating reservoir microbiology and water geochemistry

– Establish multiple confidentiality and assistance agreements with natural gas producers

14

• Helium Assessment is the result of Section 16 of the Helium Sterwardship Act of 2013, which directs the USGS to “complete a national helium gas assessment that identifies and quantifies the quantity of helium”

• This assessment leverages ongoing Geologic CO2 Sequestration Project Tasks, primarily Natural CO2 research, and the CO2-Enhanced Oil Recovery Assessment

Helium inventory

Ballentine and others (2002); Holland and Gilfillan (2013)

• Worked with Bureau of Land Management (BLM) to obtain significant volumes of internal helium data

• Created a public database of helium concentrations in United States Wells (Brennan and others, 2016)

• National helium assessment underway

15

Illinois Basin

USGS Mt. Simon Storage Assessment Unit

Well data

Mount Simon thickness

Develop economic models:

• Representative economic/engineering cost models for saline formations

• Economic cost model for carbon dioxide extraction from natural sources

Describe/delineate costs of

• Site preparation and investment

• Pressure management

• Risk mitigation

• Monitoring

Work in coordination with the USGS Economics, Energy Resources, and Future Energy Supply project

Economics of CO2 Storage and Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR)

Petroleum engineering modeling tools that estimate injection capacities and pressure buildup for Mount Simon Sandstone

16

Storage of CO2 in unconventional geologic reservoirs

Tollefson (2013)

CO2 storage in basaltic and ultra-mafic rocks

Goodman and others (2014) 17

The USGS also studies rock types that have the potential to store CO2 through different mechanisms, including CO2 mineralization in mafic basalts and ultramafic rocks, and CO2 sorption onto organic-rich shales and coals.

Background on Decatur & CCS

Strandli and others, 2014

Lower perm. zones

• Injection occurs right over crystalline basement into the lower Mount Simon Sandstone

• Extensive evidence of heterogeneous permeability structure (vertically, horizontally)

• Similar physics as wastewater injection sites except: buoyancy, compressibility, and mobility of super critical CO2

• Same concerns: pore pressure change, mass added, poro-elastic strain changes

• Better opportunity to learn about physical mechanisms governing induced seismicity:

– Seismic monitoring

– In-situ stress analyses

– Thermal, hydraulic, and mechanical models of injection & deformation

Induced seismicity associated with CO2 geologic storage

18

Locations of microseismic events and USGS monitoring stations

Induced seismicity associated with CO2 geologic storage

39.90 N

88.92 W 88.88 W

Borehole station

Surface station

Kaven and others (2015)

Double-difference relocated microseismicity using differential travel times from phase arrival times and waveform cross correlation (correlation coefficient ≥ 0:7). Focal mechanisms are from P-wave polarity for six events. Regional orientation of the maximum horizontal principal stress (SHmax) is indicated by opposing arrows.

19

“First, in order to better understand and manage carbon emissions on public lands, the Interior Department’s U.S. Geological Survey will establish and maintain a public database to account for the annual carbon emissions from fossil fuels developed on federal lands.” U.S. Department of the Interior (2016)

Estimating greenhouse gas emissions from

fossil fuels produced from Federal lands

USGS Federal Lands Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sequestration Project (FLGGES)

20

• Report both emissions and sinks (and both gross and net emissions)

• Emissions: • CO2 + CH4 + N2O

• resulting from the production and end use of onshore and offshore coal, oil, and natural gas produced on federal lands

• Sinks: • Biological carbon sequestration • (Later) Re-injection and enhanced oil recovery geologic

sequestration

• Annually from 2005 to present

• For all Federal lands and Federal lands by state

FLGGES Desired End Product

Merrill and others (2016) 21

Department of Interior • Office of Natural Resources Revenue (ONRR) • Bureau of Land Management (BLM) • Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) Additional Agencies • Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) • U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) • Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA)

Modified EPA GHG Inventory

Methodology

Fossil Fuel Production from

Federal Lands ONRR

Biological Sequestration

USGS + USDA

NET EMISSIONS

Emissions from Activities

BLM, BOEM, MSHA

Basic FLGGES Method

GHG Emissions: Fossil Fuels from Federal Lands

Geologic Sequestration

(future versions?)

Emissions Sequestration

Forested Land (USDA)

Non-forested Land (USGS)

Inputs

Method

Outputs

Abbreviations: Greenhouse Gas (GHG)

Reconciliation of Land

Representation

Merrill and others (2016) Reed (2016) 22

Cooperators and outreach

• State Geological Survey and university Co-ops

• Stanford and Univ. Texas at Austin CO2 working groups

• Member of DOE National Risk Assessment Partnership Stakeholders Group

• Member of Interagency Carbon Capture and Storage working group

• Member of International Standards Organization working groups on Carbon Capture and Storage and CO2-enhanced oil recovery

• Member of International Energy Agency working group on assessing CO2 storage capacities

• Industry partners (Electric utilities, software developers, oil and gas operators)

CO2 project website: http://go.usa.gov/8X8

23

Next steps • Complete national CO2-enhanced oil recovery assessment • Expand induced seismicity research • Better characterize potential geologic CO2 storage

formations • Build in pressure, injection rate, time, and economics into

future CO2 storage assessments • Conduct numerical modeling for hydrodynamic and

geochemical interactions with CO2 storage • Complete national helium inventory • Complete Federal lands greenhouse gas emissions and

sequestration

24

Summary of take-away points • Geologic storage of CO2 is essential to meet future CO2

emission reduction scenarios1

The USGS is a recognized world leader in:

• The geology of CO2 storage

• Resource assessments CO2 storage

Enhanced oil recovery

Economics of CO2 storage and energy-related resources

• Induced seismicity

1Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2014); International Energy Agency (2015)

25

References Cited Ballentine C.J., Burnard P.G., 2002, Production, release and transport of noble gases in the continental crust. In: Porcelli DR, BallentineCJ, Weiler R (eds) Noble gases in geochemistry and cosmochemistry, p. 481–538.

Berennan, S.T., East, J.A., Dennen, K.O., Jahediesfanjani, Hossein, Varela, Brian, 2016, Helium concentrations in United States wells: U.S. Geological Survey

Provisional Database, http://energy.usgs.gov/EnvironmentalAspects/EnvironmentalAspectsofEnergyProductionandUse/GeologicCO2Sequestration.aspx#377624-data.

Buursink, M.L., 2014, Significance of carbon dioxide density estimates for basin-scale storage resource assessment: Energy Procedia, v. 63, p. 5130–5140, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2014.11.543

Department of Energy National Energy Technology Laboratory, 2010, Carbon dioxide enhanced oil recovery, untapped domestic energy supply

and long term carbon storage solution: Department of Energy National Energy Technology Laboratory, 30 p., https://www.netl.doe.gov/file%20library/research/oil-gas/small_CO2_EOR_Primer.pdf.

Hamburger, M.W., Shoemaker, K., Horton, S., DeShon, H., Withers, M., Pavlis, G.L., and Sherrill, E., 2011, Aftershocks of the 2008 Mt.

Carmel, Illinois, earthquake: Evidence for conjugate faulting near the termination of the Wabash Valley fault system, Seismol. Res. Lett. 82, 735–747, doi: 10.1785/Gssrl.82.5.735.

Global CCS Institute, 2015, website, www.globalccsinstitute.com/content/information-resource.

Holand, Greg, and Gilfillan, Stuart, 2013, Application of noble gases to the viability of CO2 storage, in Burnard, Pete, ed., The noble gases as geochemical tracers, advances in isotope geochemistry, Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg, p. 177-223, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-28836-4_8.

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, 2014a, Summary for policymakers, in Edenhofer, O., Pichs-Madruga, R., Sokona, Y., Farahani, E., Kadner, S., Seyboth, K., Adler, A., Baum, I., Brunner, S., Eickemeier, P., Kriemann, B., Savolainen, J., Schlömer, S., von Stechow, C., Zwickel T., and Minx, J.C., eds., Climate Change 2014—Mitigation of Climate Change—Contribution of Working Group III to the fifth assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change: Cambridge, United Kingdom, and New York, New York, Cambridge University Press, 31 p.

International Energy Agency, 2012, Pathways to a clean energy system, Energy technology perspectives 2012: International Energy Agency, Paris, France, 686 p., https://www.iea.org/publications/freepublications/publication/ETP2012_free.pdf.

International Energy Agency, 2013, Carbon capture and storage, technology roadmap: International Energy Agency, Paris, France, 59 p., http://www.iea.org/publications/freepublications/publication/technology-roadmap-carbon-capture-and-storage-2013.html.

International Energy Agency, 2015, World energy outlook special report, energy climate and change: International Energy Agency, Paris, France, 196 p. https://www.iea.org/publications/freepublications/publication/weo-2015-special-report-energy-climate-change.html.

26

References Cited (cont.) Kaven, J.O., Hickman, S.H., McGarr, A.F., and Ellsworth, W.L., 2015, Surface monitoring of microseismicity at the Decatur, Illinois, CO2 sequestration demonstration site: Seismological Research Letters, vol. 86, no. 4, p. 1096–1101., http://dx.doi.org/10.1785/0220150062.

Le Quéré and 49 other authors, 2014, Global carbon budget 2013: Earth System Science Data, v. 6, p. 335-263., http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/essd-6-235-2014.

Litynski, J.T., 2015, U.S. DOE Carbon Capture Program: Air and Waste Management Association – Florida Section 51st Annual Conference, October 28th, 2015, 26 p., http://floridasection.awma.org/Conference_Files/2015_Conference_Presentations/CCS_US_Litynski_AWMA2_27Oct2015.pdf.

Merrill, Matthew, Freeman, Philip, Warwick, Peter, 2016, Status Report–Estimating greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuels produced from Federal lands: U.S. Geological Survey Stakeholder Briefing for Federal Lands Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sequestration (FLGGES), December 2, 2016, Reston, VA, 32 p. http://energy.usgs.gov/Portals/0/Rooms/co2_sequestration/text/FLGGES%20public%20meeting%20Emissions_WebFinal.pdf.

Nelson, P.H., Gianoutsos, N.J., and Drake R.M. II, 2015, Underpressure in Mesozoic and Paleozoic rock units in the midcontinent of the United States: American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, v. 99, no. 10, p. 1861 – 1892, http://dx.doi.org/10.1306/04171514169.

Reed, Bradley, 2016, Approach for estimating biological carbon sequestration on Federal lands: U.S. Geological Survey Stakeholder Briefing for Federal Lands Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sequestration (FLGGES), December 2, 2016, Reston, VA, 24 p.

Strandli, C.W., Mehnert, Edward, Benson, S.M., 2014, CO2 plume tracking and history matching using multilevel pressure monitoring at the Illinois Basin – Decatur Project , Energy Procedia, v. 63, p. 4473–44484, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2014.11.483.

Warwick, P.D., Verma, M.K., Attanasi, E.D., Olea, R.A., Blondes, M.S., Freeman, P.A., Brennan, S.T. Merrill, M.D., Jahediesfanjani, Hossein, Roueche, J.N., and Lohr, C.D., 2016 in press, A database and probabilistic assessment methodology for carbon dioxide enhanced oil recovery and associated carbon dioxide retention in the United States: Energy Procedia, The Greenhouse Gas Control Technologies (GHGT) conference, 14-18 November, 2016, Lausanne, Switzerland, 5 p.

U.S. Energy Information Administration, 2015, Annual energy outlook 2015 with projections to 2040: U.S. Energy Information Administration [Report] DOE/EIA-0383(2015), ES1 – G1 p., accessed June 4, 2014, at http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/aeo/pdf/0383(2014).pdf.

U.S. Department of the Interior, 2016, Modernizing the Federal coal program: U.S. Department of the Interior Fact Sheet, 3 p., https://www.blm.gov/style/medialib/blm/wo/Communications_Directorate/public_affairs/news_release_attachments.Par.47489.File.dat/Coal%20Reform%20Fact%20Sheet%20Final.pdf.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2015, Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks – 1990-2013: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency EPA 430-R-15-004, p. ES1-10-71., http://www3.epa.gov/climatechange/ghgemissions/usinventoryreport.html.

U.S. Geological Survey Geologic Carbon Dioxide Storage Resources Assessment Team, 2013, National assessment of geologic carbon dioxide storage resources—Results: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1386, 41 p., available online at http://pubs.usgs.gov/circ/1386/.

27

`

Carbon Sequestration—Geologic Research and Assessments Project

For more information contact: Peter D. Warwick pwarwick@usgs.gov 703-648-6469

Project Website

Selected Publications

http://go.usa.gov/8X8

http://go.usa.gov/xZDpz 28