Advertisement

Transport in Porous Media

, Volume 72, Issue 1, pp 1–24 | Cite as

CO2 injection into saline carbonate aquifer formations I: laboratory investigation

  • Omer Izgec
  • Birol Demiral
  • Henri Bertin
  • Serhat AkinEmail author
Article

Abstract

Although there are a number of mathematical modeling studies for carbon dioxide (CO2) injection into aquifer formations, experimental studies are limited and most studies focus on injection into sandstone reservoirs as opposed to carbonate ones. This study presents the results of computerized tomography (CT) monitored laboratory experiments to analyze permeability and porosity changes as well as to characterize relevant chemical reactions associated with injection and storage of CO2 in carbonate formations. CT monitored experiments are designed to model fast near well bore flow and slow reservoir flows. Highly heterogeneous cores drilled from a carbonate aquifer formation located in South East Turkey were used during the experiments. Porosity changes along the core plugs and the corresponding permeability changes are reported for different CO2 injection rates and different salt concentrations of formation water. It was observed that either a permeability increase or a permeability reduction can be obtained. The trend of change in rock properties is very case dependent because it is related to distribution of pores, brine composition and thermodynamic conditions. As the salt concentration decreases, porosity and the permeability decreases are less pronounced. Calcite deposition is mainly influenced by orientation, with horizontal flow resulting in larger calcite deposition compared to vertical flow.

Keywords

Carbon dioxide injection in carbonates Geological sequestration Permeability and porosity change 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Akin, S., Kovscek, A.R.: Computed tomography in petroleum research. In: Mees, F., Swennen, R., Van Geet, M., Jacobs P. (eds.) Application of X-ray Computed Tomography in the Geosciences, pp. 23–38. Geological Society of London (2003)Google Scholar
  2. Bachu S. and Adams J.J. (2003). Sequestration of CO2 in geological media in response to climate change: capacity of deep saline aquifers to sequester CO2 in solution. Energy Convers. Manage. 44: 3151–3175 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bartels, J., Kühn, M., Schneider, W., Clauser, C., Pape, H., Meyn, V., Lajczak, I.: Core flooding laboratory experiment validates numerical simulation of induced permeability change in reservoir sandstone. Geophys. Res. Lett. 29(9), 10.1029/2002GL014901 (2002)Google Scholar
  4. Bekri S., Thovert J.F. and Adler P.M. (1995). Dissolution of porous media. Chem. Eng. Sci. 50: 2765–2791 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bernabe Y., Mok U. and Evans B. (2003). Permeability–porosity relationships in rocks subjected to various evolution processes. Pure Appl. Geophys. 160: 937–960 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bhat S.K. and Kovscek A.R. (1999). Statistical network theory of silica deposition and dissolution in diatomite. In Situ 23: 21–53 Google Scholar
  7. Bjorlykke K. (1989). Sedimentology and Petroleum Geology. Springer-Verlag, New York Google Scholar
  8. Clauser C. (ed) (2003). Numerical Simulation of Reactive Flow in Hot Aquifers using SHEMAT/Processing Shemat. Springer Verlag, Heidelberg-Berlin Google Scholar
  9. Computer Modeling Group (CMG): CMG STARS User’s Guide. Computer Modeling Group Ltd., Calgary, Alberta, Canada (2003)Google Scholar
  10. David C., Wong T.-F., Zhu W. and Zhang J. (1994). Laboratory measurement of compaction-induced permeability change in porous rock: implications for the generation and maintenance of pore pressure excess in the crust. Pure Appl. Geophys. 143: 425–456 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Diabira I., Castanier L.M. and Kovscek A.R. (2001). Porosity and permeability evolution accompanying hot fluid injection into diatomite. Petrol. Sci. Technol. 19(9&10): 1167–1185 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Doughty, C., Pruess, K.: Modeling supercritical carbon dioxide injection in heterogeneous porous media. Vadose Zone Journal. 3(3), 837–847 (2004)Google Scholar
  13. Gabriel, G.A., Inamdar, G.R.: An experimental investigation of fines migration in porous media. SPE 12168, 58th Annual Technical Conference and Exhibition, San Francisco, CA, October 5–8 (1983)Google Scholar
  14. Goldberg, P., Chen, Z.-Y., O’Connor, W., Walters, R., Ziock, H.: CO2 mineral sequestration studies in US. In: Proceedings of the First National Conference on Carbon Sequestration, Washington, DC, U.S.A., May 14–17 (2001)Google Scholar
  15. Gunter W.D., Perkins E.H. and Hutcheon I. (2000). Aquifer disposal of acid gases: modelling of water–rock reactions for trapping of acid wastes. Appl. Geochem. 15: 1085–1095 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gunter, W.D., Perkins, E.H., McCann, T.J.: Aquifer disposal of CO2-rich gases: reaction design for added capacity. Energ. Convers. Manage. 37, 1135–1142 (1993)Google Scholar
  17. Gunter W.D., Wiwchar B. and Perkins E.H. (1997). Aquifer disposal of CO2-rich greenhouse gases: extension of the time scale of experiment for CO2-sequestering reactions by geochemical modelling. Mineral. Petrol. 59: 121–140 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hibbeler, J., Garcia, T., Chavez, N.: An integrated long term solution for migratory fines damage. SPE Latin American and Caribbean Petroleum Engineering Conference, Port of Spain, Trinidad, West Indies, 27–30 April (2003)Google Scholar
  19. Holtz, H.M.: Pore-scale influences on saline aquifer CO2 sequestration. AAPG 2003 Meeting, Salt Lake City, Utah, May 11–14 (2003)Google Scholar
  20. Hovorka, S.D., Benson, S.M., Doughty, C., Freifeld, B.M., Sakurai, S., Daley, T.M., Kharaka, Y.K., Holtz, M.H., Trautz, R.C., Nance, H.S., Myer, L.R., Knauss, K.G.: Measuring permanence of CO2 storage in saline formations -the Frio experiment. Environ. Geosci. 13, 105–121 (2006)Google Scholar
  21. Itoi, R., Fukuda, M., Jinno, K., Shimizu, S., Tomita, T.: Numerical analysis of the injectivity of wells in the Otake geothermal field, Japan. In: Proceedings 9th New Zealand Geothermal Workshop, November 4–6, Geothermal Institute, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand, pp. 103–108 (1987)Google Scholar
  22. Izgec, O., Demiral, B., Bertin, H., Akin, S.: Calcite precipitation in low temperature geothermal systems: an experimental approach. In: 30th Workshop on Geothermal Reservoir Engineering, Stanford University, Stanford, California, TR-176 (2005a)Google Scholar
  23. Izgec, O., Demiral, B., Bertin, H., Akin, S.: CO2 injection in carbonates. In: SPE Western Regional Meeting, Irvine, CA, USA, SPE Paper 93773 (2005b)Google Scholar
  24. Izgec, O., Demiral, B., Bertin, H., Akin, S.: Experimental and numerical investigation of carbon sequestration in deep saline aquifers. In: SPE/EPA/DOE Exploration and Production Environmental Conference, Galveston, Texas, SPE Paper 94697 (2005c)Google Scholar
  25. Izgec, O., Demiral, B., Bertin, H., Akin, S.: CO2 injection into saline carbonate aquifer formations II: comparison of numerical simulations to experiments Transport Porous Media (to appear) (2007)Google Scholar
  26. Johnson J.W., Nitao J.J., Morris J.P.: Reactive transport modeling of cap rock integrity during natural and engineered CO2 sequestration. Abstr. Pap. Am. Chem. S., 226: U604-U604 137-GEOC Part 1. (2003)Google Scholar
  27. Kaszuba J.P. and Janecky D.R. (2000). Experimental hydration and carbonation reactions of MgO: a simple analog for subsurface carbon sequestration processes. Geol. Soc. Am., Abstr. with Prog. 32: A202 Google Scholar
  28. Kaszuba J.P., Janecky D.R. and Snow M.G. (2001). Carbon dioxide reaction processes in a model brine aquifer at 200 C and 200 bars: implications for subsurface carbon sequestration. Geol. Soc. Am., Abstr. with Prog. 33: A232 Google Scholar
  29. Kaszuba J.P., Janecky D.R. and Snow M.G. (2003). Carbon dioxide reaction processes in a model brine aquifer at 200^C and 200 bars: implications for geologic sequestration of carbon. Appl. Geochem. 18: 1065–1080 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kumar, A., Ozah, R., Noh, M., Pope, G.A., Bryant, S., Sepehrnoori, K., Lake, L.W.: Reservoir simulation of CO2 storage in deep saline aquifers. SPE J. 10 (3): 336–348 (2005)Google Scholar
  31. Kühn M. (2004). Reactive flow modeling of hydrothermal systems. Lect. Notes Earth Sci. 103: 209–226 Google Scholar
  32. Lichtner P.C. (1996). Continuum formulation of multicomponent – multiphase reactive transport. Rev. Mineral. Geochem. 34(1): 83–129 Google Scholar
  33. McCume C.C., Forgler H.S. and Kline W.E. (1979). An experiment technique for obtaining permeability–porosity relationship in acidized porous media. Ind. Eng. Chem. Fundam. 18(2): 188–192 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. McPherson, B.J.O.L., Lichtner, P.C.: CO2 sequestration in deep aquifers. In: Proceedings of the First National Conference on Carbon Sequestration, Washington, DC, U.S.A., May 14–17 (2001)Google Scholar
  35. Moghadasi J., Müller-Steinhagen H., Jamialahmadi M. and Sharif A. (2005). Model Study on the kinetics of oil formation damage due to salt precipitation from injection. J. Petrol. Sci. Eng. 46(4): 299–299 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Nghiem, L., Sammon, P., Grabenstetter, J., Ohkuma, H.: Modeling CO2 storage in aquifers with a fully-coupled geochemical EOS compositional simulator. SPE 89474-MS, SPE/DOE Symposium on Improved Oil Recovery, Tulsa, Oklahoma., April 17–21 (2004)Google Scholar
  37. Nordbotten M.J., Celia A.M. and Bachu S. (2004). Injection and storage of CO2 in deep saline aquifers: analytical solution for CO2 plume evolution during injection. Transport Porous Media 58(3): 339–360 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Omole, O., Osoba, J.S.: Carbondioxide–dolomite rock interaction during CO2 flooding process. In: 34th Annual Technical Meeting of the Petroleum Society of CIM, Canada (1983)Google Scholar
  39. Pange M.K.R. and Ziauddin M. (2005). Two-scale continuum model for simulation of wormholes in carbonate acidization. AIChE J. 51(12): 3231–3248 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Parkhurst, D.L., Appelo, C.A.J.: User’s guide to PHREEQC (Version 2) – a computer program for speciation, batch-reaction, one-dimensional transport, and inverse geochemical calculations: U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 99-4259, 312 pp (1999)Google Scholar
  41. Perkins, E.H., Gunter, W.D.: Aquifer disposal of CO2-rich greenhouse gasses: modelling of water–rock reaction paths in a siliciclastic aquifer. In: Kharaka, Y.K., Chudaev, O.V. (eds.) Proceedings of the 8th International Symposium on Water–Rock Interaction, pp. 895–898 (1995)Google Scholar
  42. Pruess, K., Xu, T.: Numerical modeling of aquifer disposal of CO2. In: SPE/EPA/DOE Exploration and Production Environmental Conference, San Antonio, Texas, SPE Paper 83695 (2001)Google Scholar
  43. Pruess, K., Xu T.F., Apps, J., Garcia, J.: Numerical modeling of aquifer disposal of CO2. SPE J. 8(1), 49–60 (2003)Google Scholar
  44. Quintard M. and Whitaker S. (1999). Dissolution of an immobile phase during flow in porous media. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 38: 833–844 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Reichle, D., Houghton, J., Benson, S., Clarke, J., Dahlman, R., Hendrey, G., Herzog, H., Hunter-Cevera, J., Jacobs, G., Judkins, R., Kane, B., Ekmann, J., Ogden, J., Palmisano, A., Socolow, R., Stringer, J., Surles, T., Wolsky, A., Woodward, N., York, M.: Carbon Sequestration Research and Development, Office of Science, Office of Fossil Energy, U.S. Department of Energy (1999)Google Scholar
  46. Ross, G.D., Todd, A.C., Tweedie, J.A., Will, A.G.S.: The dissolution effects of CO2–brine systems on the permeability of U.K. and North Sea Calcareous Sandstones. In: Proceedings of Society of Petroleum Engineers/U.S. Department of Energy Third Joint Symposium on Enhanced Oil Recovery, Paper SPE/DOE 10685, pp. 149–154 (1982)Google Scholar
  47. Saripalli P. and McGrail P. (2002). Semi-analytical approaches to modeling deep well injection of CO2 for geological sequestration. Energy Convers. Manage. 43: 185–198 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Snoeyink, L.W., Jenkins, D.: Water Chemistry, pp. 85–135. John Wiley & Sons Publications (1980)Google Scholar
  49. Spycher N., Pruess K. and Ennis-King J. (2003). CO2–H2O mixtures in the geological sequestration of CO2. I. Assessment and calculation of mutual solubilities from 12 to 100°C and up to 600 bar. Geochim. Cosmochim. Acta 67(16): 3015–3031 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Soong Y., Goodman A.L., McCarthy-Jones J.R. and Baltrus J.P. (2004). Experimental and simulation studies on mineral trapping of CO2 with brine. Energy Convers. Manage. 45: 1845–1859 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Walsh J.B. and Brace W.F. (1984). The effect of pressure on porosity and the transport properties of rocks. J. Geophys. Res. 89: 9425–9431 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Zarrouk, S.J., O’Sullivan, M.J.: The effect of chemical reactions on the transport properties of porous media. In: Simmons, S., Dunstall, M.G., Morgan, O.E. (eds.) Proceedings 23rd New Zealand Geothermal Workshop, November 7–9, Auckland University, New Zealand, pp. 231–236 (2001)Google Scholar
  53. Zhang, D., Kang, Q.: Simulation of coupled flow, transport, and reaction in porous media by lattice Boltzmann method. In: 2004 AGU Fall Meeting, San Francisco, U.S.A. H32A-06 (2004)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Omer Izgec
    • 1
  • Birol Demiral
    • 1
  • Henri Bertin
    • 2
  • Serhat Akin
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Petroleum and Natural Gas Engineering DepartmentMiddle East Technical UniversityAnkaraTurkey
  2. 2.Laboratoire TREFLEEsplanade des Arts et MétiersTalence CedexFrance

Personalised recommendations