Environmental Geology

, Volume 54, Issue 6, pp 1207–1215 | Cite as

Determining effective wellbore permeability from a field pressure test: a numerical analysis of detection limits

  • Sarah E. Gasda
  • Jan M. Nordbotten
  • Michael A. Celia
Original Paper

Abstract

We propose a simple pressure test that can be used in the field to determine the effective permeability of existing wellbores. Such tests are motivated by the need to understand and quantify leakage risks associated with geological storage of CO2 in mature sedimentary basins. If CO2 is injected into a deep geological formation, and the resulting CO2 plume encounters a wellbore, leakage may occur through various pathways in the “disturbed zone” surrounding the well casing. The effective permeability of this composite zone, on the outside of the well casing, is an important parameter for models of leakage. However, the data that exist on this key parameter do not exist in the open literature, and therefore specific field tests need to be done in order to reduce the uncertainty inherent in the leakage estimates. The test designed and analyzed herein is designed to measure effective wellbore permeability within a low-permeability caprock, bounded above and below by permeable reservoirs, by pressurizing the reservoir below and measuring the response in the reservoir above. Alternatively, a modified test can be performed within the caprock without directly contacting the reservoirs above and below. We use numerical simulation to relate pressure response to effective well permeability and then evaluate the range of detection of the effective permeability based on instrument measurement error and limits on fracture pressure. These results can guide field experiments associated with site characterization and leakage analysis.

References

  1. Anfort SJ, Bachu S, Bentley LR (2001) Regional-scale hydrogeology of the Upper Devonian–Lower Cretaceous sedimentary succession, south-central Alberta Basin, Canada. Am Assoc Petrol Geol 85:637–660Google Scholar
  2. Avci CB (1994) Evaluation of flow leakage through abandoned wells and boreholes. Water Resour Res 30:2565–2578CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bachu S (2000) Sequestration of CO2 in geological media: criteria and approach for site selection in response to climate change. Energy Convers Manage 41:953–970CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bachu S (2002) Sequestration of CO2 in geological media in response to climate change: road map for site selection using the transform of the geological space into the CO2 phase space. Energy Convers Manage 43:87–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bachu S, Haug K, Michael K, Buschkuehle BE, Adams JJ (2005) Deep injection of acid-gas in western Canada. In: Tsang CF, Apps JA (eds) Underground injection science and technology. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 623–635Google Scholar
  6. Bear J (1972) Dynamics of fluids in porous media. Elsevier, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  7. Bruant RG, Guswa AJ, Celia MA, Peters CA (2002) Safe storage of CO2 in deep saline aquifers. Environ Sci Technol 36:240A–245ACrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Celia MA, Bachu S, Nordbotten JM, Kavetski D, Gasda SE (2006) A risk assessment tool to quantify CO2 leakage potential through wells in mature sedimentary basins. Paper presented at the 8th international conference on greenhouse gas control technologies, Trondheim, 19–22 June, 2006Google Scholar
  9. Chesnaux R, Chapuis RP, Molson JW (2006) A new method to characterize hydraulic short-circuits in defective borehole seals. Ground Water 44:676–681Google Scholar
  10. Gasda SE, Bachu S, Celia MA (2004) Spatial characterization of the location of potentially leaky wells penetrating a deep saline aquifer in a mature sedimentary basin. Environ Geol 46:707–720CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Holloway S (2001) Storage of fossil fuels-derived carbon dioxide beneath the surface of the earth. Annu Rev Energy Environ 26:145–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Javandel I, Tsang CF, Witherspoon PA, Morganwalp D (1988) Hydrologic detection of abandoned wells near proposed injection wells for hazardous-waste disposal. Water Resour Res 24:261–270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Nelson EB (1990) Well cementing (developments in petroleum science). Elsevier, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  14. Nordbotten JM, Celia MA, Bachu S, Dahle HK (2005) Semianalytical solution for CO2 leakage through an abandoned well. Environ Sci Technol 39:602–611CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Schlumberger Ltd (2007) UNIGAGE Quartz Specifications. http://www.slb.com/content/services/testing/data/unigage_quartz_gauge_specs.asp. Cited 11 March 2007

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sarah E. Gasda
    • 1
  • Jan M. Nordbotten
    • 1
    • 2
  • Michael A. Celia
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Civil and Environmental EngineeringPrinceton UniversityPrincetonUSA
  2. 2.Department of MathematicsUniversity of BergenBergenNorway

Personalised recommendations