Environmental Earth Sciences

, 78:646 | Cite as

Carbon sequestration at the Illinois Basin-Decatur Project: experimental results and geochemical simulations of storage

  • Peter M. BergerEmail author
  • Lois Yoksoulian
  • Jared T. Freiburg
  • Shane K. Butler
  • William R. Roy
Original Article


The Midwest Geological Sequestration Consortium is conducting the Illinois Basin-Decatur Project (IBDP), a large-scale demonstration of carbon sequestration that injected the CO2 from an ethanol plant into the Mt. Simon Sandstone. Using site-specific data and samples, batch experiments were conducted at reservoir conditions and the reactive transport code TOUGHREACT was used to model the CO2 migration and interactions in the injection formation. In the model, most of the mineral alteration occurred after the injection was completed and brine displaced the CO2 at the base of the plume. K-feldspar dissolution led to a nearly 10% increase in porosity which is a maximum estimate of alteration because, the model omits mineral transformations and may underestimate clay precipitation and the effects of grain coatings. The batch experiments recreated these conditions and showed a little alteration. In both the model and experiments, the bulk of the mineralogy remained inert. Calcite precipitated within the modeled plume where the transformation of K-feldspar to clays buffered the pH, though this process only produced minor mineral sequestration. Less-permeable layers in the model baffled the ascent of the CO2 plume and caused it to spread laterally. The plume did not reach the upper third of the Mt. Simon Sandstone. Both the model and the batch experiments show that the bulk of the Mt. Simon Sandstone will undergo little change due to CO2 injection, and the batch experiments show the feldspar dissolution in the model is likely limited.


Carbon sequestration Mt. Simon Reactive transport model Batch experiment Kinetics 



We thank Scott Frailey and James Damico of the ISGS for the information on permeability and porosity, and Ivan Krapac, Bracken Wimmer, Abbas Iranmanesh, Chris Patterson, and Randy Locke for the water chemistry data. This material is based upon work supported by the US Department of Energy National Energy Technology Laboratory under Award Number DE-FC26-05NT42588 with support, in part, by awards made possible by the Illinois Department of Commerce and Economic Opportunity through the Office of Coal Development and the Illinois Clean Coal Institute. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Illinois Department of Commerce and Economic Opportunity, the Office of Coal Development, or the Illinois Clean Coal Institute. This publication was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof.


  1. Archie GE (1942) The electrical resistivity log as an aid in determining some reservoir characteristics. J Petrol Technol 5:54–62Google Scholar
  2. Armitage PJ, Faulkner DR, Worden RH, Aplin AC, Butcher AR, Iliffe J (2011) Experimental measurement of, and controls on, permeability and permeability anisotropy of caprocks from the CO2 storage project at the Krechba Field, Algeria. J Geophys Res 116:B12208CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bethke CM (1996) Geochemical reaction modeling. Oxford University Press, New York, p 397Google Scholar
  4. Bowen BB, Ochoa RI, Wilkens ND, Brophy J, Lovell TR, Fischietto N, Medina CR, Rupp JA (2011) Depositional and diagenetic variability within the Cambrian Mount Simon Sandstone: implications for carbon dioxide sequestration. Environ Geosci 18:69–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Carroll SA, McNab WW, Dai Z, Torres SC (2013) Reactivity of Mount Simon sandstone and the Eau Claire shale under CO2 storage conditions. Environ Sci Technol 47:252–261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chiquet P, Broseta D (2005) Capillary alteration of shaly caprocks by carbon dioxide. In: SPE Europe/EAGE annual conference, Madrid, SpainGoogle Scholar
  7. Collinson C, Sargent ML, Jennings JR (1988) Illinois Basin region. In: Sloss LL (ed) Sedimentary cover—North American Craton: U.S., vol D-2. The Geology of North America. Geological Society of America, Boulder, pp 383–426Google Scholar
  8. Corey AT (1954) The interrelation between gas and oil relative permeabilities. Prod Mon 19:38–41Google Scholar
  9. da Rocha SRP, Harrison KL, Johnston KP (1999) Effect of surfactants on the interfacial tension and emulsion formation between water and carbon dioxide. Langmuir 15:419–422CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Frailey SM, Damico J, Leetaru HE (2011) Reservoir characterization of the Mt. Simon Sandstone, Illinois Bain, USA. Energy Procedia 4:5487–5494CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Freiburg JT, Morse DG, Leetaru HE, Hoss RP, Yan Q (2014) A depositional and diagenetic characterization of the Mt. Simon Sandstone at the Illinois Basin-Decatur Project carbon capture and storage site, Decatur, Illinois, USA. Illinois State Geological Survey, Circular 583Google Scholar
  12. Freiburg JT, Leetaru HE, Monson CC (2015) The Argenta Formation: a newly recognized Cambrian stratigraphic unit in the Illinois Basin. Abstracts with programs—Geol Soc Am, 47, n. 5Google Scholar
  13. Gollakota S, McDonald S (2014) Commercial-scale CCS Project in Decatur, Illinois—construction status and operational plans for demonstration. Energy Procedia 63:5986–5993CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Gunter WD, Perkins EH, McCann TJ (1993) Aquifer disposal of CO2-rich gases: reaction design for added capacity. Energy Conserv Manag 34:941–948CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Gunter WD, Wiwchar B, Perkins EH (1997) Aquifer disposal of CO2-rich greenhouse gases: extension of the time scale of experiment for CO2-sequestration reactions by geochemical modeling. Mineral Petrol 59:121–140CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hellevang H, Aagaard P, Oelkers EH, Kvamme B (2005) Can dawsonite permanently trap CO2? Environ Sci Technol 39:8281–8287CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hughes RE, Warren R (1989) Evaluation of the economic usefulness of earth materials by X-ray diffraction. In: Hughes RE, Bradbury LC (eds) 23rd Forum geology industrial minerals. Illinois State Geological Survey, pp 47–57Google Scholar
  18. Hughes RE, Moore DM, Glass HD (1994) Qualitative and quantitative analysis of clay minerals in soils. In: Quantitative methods in soil mineralogy, vol 677S. Soil Science Society of America, MadisonGoogle Scholar
  19. IPCC (2007) Mitigation. In: Metz B, Davidson PR, Bosch PR, Dave R, Meyer LA (eds) Contribution of Working Group III to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  20. Johnson JW, Nitao JJ, Knauss KG (2004) Reactive transport modelling of CO2 storage in saline aquifers to elucidate fundamental processes, trapping mechanisms, and sequestration partitioning. In: Baines SJ, Worden RH (eds) Geological Society of London Special publication on carbon sequestration technologies, vol 233, pp 107–128CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kharaka YK, Thordsen JJ, Hovorka SD, Nance HS, Cole DR, Phelps TJ, Knauss KG (2009) Potential environmental issues of CO2 storage in deep saline aquifers: geochemical results from the Frio-I Brine Pilot test, Texas, USA. Appl Geochem 24:1106–1112CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Knauss KG, Johnson JW, Steefel CI (2005) Evaluation of the impact of CO2, co-contaminant gas, aqueous fluid and reservoir rock interactions on the geologic sequestration of CO2. Chem Geol 217:339–350CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kongsjorden H, Kårstad O, Torp TA (1998) Saline aquifer storage of carbon dioxide in the Sleipner project. Waste Manag 17:303–308CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lasaga AC (1984) Chemical kinetics of water-rock interactions. J Geophys Res 89:4009–4025CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lasaga AC, Soler JM, Ganor J, Burch TE, Nagy KL (1994) Chemical weathering rate laws and global geochemical cycles. Geochim Cosmochim Acta 58:2361–2386CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Leetaru HE, Freiburg JT (2014) Litho-facies and reservoir characterization of the Mt Simon Sandstone at the Illinois Basin-Decatur Project. Greenh Gases Sci Technol 4:580–595CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Leetaru HE, McBride JH (2009) Reservoir uncertainty, Precambrian topography, and carbon sequestration in the Mt. Simon Sandstone, Illinois Basin. Environ Geosci 16:235–243CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Liu F, Lu P, Griffith C, Hedges SW, Soong Y, Hellevant H, Zhu C (2012) CO2–brine–caprock interaction: reactivity experiments on Eau Claire shale and a review of relevant literature. Int J Greenh Gas Control 7:153–167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Locke R II, Larssen D, Salden W, Patterson C, Kirksey J, Iranmanesh A, Wimmer B (2013) Preinjection reservoir fluid characterization at a CCS demonstration site: Illinois Basin-Decatur Project, USA. Energy Procedia 37:6424–6433CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Lu P, Fu Q, Seyfried WE, Hereford A, Zhu C (2011) Navajo Sandstone–brine–CO2 interaction: implications for geological carbon sequestration. Environ Earth Sci 62:101–118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Mathieson A, Midgely J, Wright I, Saoula N, Ringrose P (2010) In Salah CO2 Storage JIP: CO2 sequestration monitoring and verification technologies applied at Krechba, Algeria. Energy Procedia 4:3596–3603CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Moore DM, Reynolds RC Jr (1997) X-ray diffraction and the identification and analysis of clay minerals, 2nd edn. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  33. Mualem YA (1976) A new model for prediction the hydraulic conductivity of unsaturated porous media. Water Resour Res 12(3):513–522CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) (2012) Carbon sequestration atlas of the United States and Canada, 3rd ednGoogle Scholar
  35. Nugent MA, Brantley SL, Patano CG, Maurice PA (1998) The influence of coatings on feldspar weathering. Nature 395:588–591CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Palandri JL, Kharaka YK (2004) A compilation of rate parameters of water-mineral interaction kinetics for application to geochemical modeling. USGS Open File Report 2004-1068Google Scholar
  37. Pham VTH, Lu P, Aagaard P, Zhu C, Hellevang H (2011) On the potential of CO2-water-rock interactions for CO2 storage using a modified kinetic model. Int J Greenh Gas Control 5:1002–1015CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Preston C, Jazrawi W, Brown K, Whittaker S, White D, Law D, Chalaturnyk R, Rostron B (2005) IEA GHG Weyburn CO2 monitoring and storage project. Fuel Process Technol 86:1547–1568CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Purcell WR (1949) Capillary pressures—their measurement using mercury and the calculation of permeability therefrom. Trans. AIME 186:39–48Google Scholar
  40. Rosenbauer RJ, Koksalan T, Palandri JL (2005) Experimental investigation of CO2-brine-rock interactions at elevated temperature and pressure: implications for CO2 sequestration in deep-saline aquifers. Fuel Process Technol 86:1581–1597CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Schoonen MAA, Sklute EC, Dyar MD, Strongin DR (2012) Reactivity of sandstones under conditions relevant to geosequestration: 1. Hematite-bearing sandstone exposed to supercritical carbon dioxide commingled with aqueous sulfite or sulfide solutions. Chem Geol 296–297:96–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. US EPA 300.0 (1993) Determination of inorganic anions by ion chromatography, US EPA Method 300.0, Revision 2.1, Methods for the determination of inorganic substances in environmental samples; EPA-600/R-93-100Google Scholar
  43. US EPA 200.7 (1994) Determination of metals and trace elements in water and wastes by inductively coupled plasma-atomic emission spectrometry, US EPA Method 200.7, Revision 4.4, Methods for the determination of metals in the environmental samples—supplement I, EPA-600/R-94-111Google Scholar
  44. van Genuchten MTh (1980) A closed-form equation for predicting the hydraulic conductivity of unsaturated soils. Soil Sc Soc Am 44:892–898CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Wolery TJ (1992) EQ3/6: software package for geochemical modeling of aqueous systems: package overview and installation guide (version 8.0), Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory Report UCRL-MA-110662 PT I, Livermore, CaliforniaGoogle Scholar
  46. Xu T, Apps JA, Pruess K (2003) Reactive geochemical transport simulation to study mineral trapping for CO2 disposal in deep arenaceous formations. J Geophys Res 108(B2):3-1–3-13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Xu T, Sonnenthal E, Spycher N, Pruess K (2004) TOUGHREACT user’s guide: a simulation program for non-isothermal multiphase reactive geochemical transport in variably saturated geologic media, LBNL-55460. Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, p 192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Xu T, Apps JA, Pruess K (2005) Mineral sequestration of carbon dioxide in a sandstone-shale system. Chem Geol 217:295–318CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Yoksoulian LE, Freiburg JT, Butler SK, Berger PM, Roy WR (2013) Mineralogical alterations during laboratory-scale carbon sequestration experiments for the Illinois Basin. Energy Procedia 37:5601–5611CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Zweigel P, Arts R, Bidstrup T, Chadwick A, Gregersen U, Hamborg M, Johanessen P, Kirby G, Kristensen L, Lindeberg E (2001) Results and experiences from the first industrial-scale underground CO2 sequestration case (Sleipner Field, North Sea). In: AAPG annual meeting extended abstract, Denver, ColoradoGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Illinois State Geological SurveyChampaignUSA
  2. 2.University of IllinoisChampaignUSA
  3. 3.Centre for Ore Deposit and Earth SciencesUniversity of TasmaniaHobartAustralia
  4. 4.Energy & Environmental Research Center (EERC)Grand ForksUSA

Personalised recommendations