Skip to main content

Monitoring gas leakages simulated in a near surface aquifer of the Ellerbek paleo-channel

Abstract

Renewable energy resources are intermittent and need buffer storage to bridge the time-gap between production and demand peaks. The North German Basin has a very large capacity for compressed air/gas energy storage (CAES) in porous saltwater reservoirs and salt cavities. Even though these geological storage systems are constructed with high caution, accidental gas leakages occurred in the past. Stored gases migrated from deep reservoirs along permeable zones upwards into shallow potable aquifers. These CAES leakages cause changes in the electro-elastic properties, and density of the aquifers, and therefore justify investigations with the application of different geophysical techniques. A multiphase flow simulation has been performed to create a realistic virtual CAES leakage scenario into a shallow aquifer in Northern Germany. This scenario is used to demonstrate the detecting resolution capability of a combined geophysical monitoring approach, consisting of acoustic joint waveform inversion (FWI) of surface and borehole data, electrical resistivity tomography (ERT) and gravity. This combined approach of geophysical multi-techniques was able to successfully map the shape and determine the physical properties of the simulated gas phase body at a very early stage after leakage began. Techniques of FWI and ERT start to resolve CAES leakage anomalies only a few years and gravity even a few months after leakage began. Geophysical monitoring of vast areas may start by conducting time-effective aero-surveys (e.g. electromagnetic induction or gravity gradient methods) to isolate anomalous subareas of potential leakage risks. These subareas are then studied in detail using our combined high-resolution approach. In conclusion, our approach is sensitive to CAES leakages and can be used for monitoring.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

References

  • al Hagrey SA (2012a) 2D model study of CO2 plumes in saline reservoirs by borehole resistivity tomography. Int J Geophys 2011:12p

    Google Scholar 

  • al Hagrey SA (2012b) 2D optimized electrode arrays for borehole resistivity tomography and CO2 sequestration modelling. Pure Appl Geophys 169(7):1283–1292

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • al Hagrey SA, Strahser M, Rabbel W (2013) Seismic and geoelectric modelling studies of parameters controlling CO2 geostorage in saline reservoirs. Int J Greenh Gas Control 19:796–806

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • al Hagrey SA, Köhn D, Robbel R (2014) Geophysical assessment of renewable gas energy compressed in geologic pore storage reservoirs. SpringerPlus 3(267):1–16

    Google Scholar 

  • Allison ML (2001) The Hutchinson gas explosions: unraveling a geologic mystery. Kansas Bar Association, 26th annual KBA/KIOGA oil and gas law conference, vol 1. pp 3-1 to 3-29

  • Archie GE (1942) The electrical resistivity log as an aid in determining some reservoir characteristics. Trans Am Inst Min Eng 146:54–62

    Google Scholar 

  • Asnaashari A, Brossier R, Garambois S, Audebert F, Thore P, Virieux J (2015) Time-lapse seismic imaging using regularized full-waveform inversion with a prior model: which strategy? Geophys Prospect 63(1):78–98

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bauer S, Beyer C, Dethlefsen F, Dietrich P, Duttmann R, Ebert M, Feeser V, Görke U, Köber R, Kolditz O, Rabbel W, Schanz T, Schäfer D, Würdemann H, Dahmke A (2013) Impacts of the use of the geological subsurface for energy storage: an investigation concept. Environ Earth Sci 70:3935–3943

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Claerbout JF, Muir F (1973) Robust modeling with erratic data. Geophysics 38:826–844

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Day-Lewis FD, Singha K, Binley AM (2005) Applying petrophysical models to radar travel time and electrical resistivity tomograms: resolution-dependent limitations. J Geophys Res 110:B08206. doi:10.1029/2004JB003569

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Delahaye C, Alonso E (1999) Modelling of gas migration in clay. http://www.cimec.org.ar/ojs/index.php/mc/article/view/1675/1639 (2016/03)

  • Dethlefsen F, Ebert M, Dahmke A (2014) A geological database for parameterization in numerical modeling of subsurface storage in northern Germany. Environ Earth Sci 71(5):2227–2244

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Esposito A, Benson SM (2012) Evaluation and development of options for remediation of CO2 leakage into groundwater aquifers from geologic carbon storage. Int J Greenh Gas Control 7:62–73

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Evans DJ (2007) An appraisal of underground gas storage technologies and incidents, for the development of risk assessment methodology. Open report OR/07/023, British Geological Survey, I: 264 p., II: 58 p

  • Gabriel G, Kirsch R, Siemon B, Wiederhold H (2003) Geophysical investigation of buried Pleistocene subglacial valleys in Northern Germany. J Appl Geophys 53:159–180

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gasperikova E, Hoversten GM (2008) Gravity monitoring of CO2 movement during sequestration: model studies. Geophysics 73(6):105–112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gassmann F (1951) Über die Elastizität poröser Medien. Vierteljahr der Nat Gesellschaft Zürich 96:1–23

    Google Scholar 

  • Götze H-J, Lahmeyer B (1988) Application of three-dimensional interactive modeling in gravity and magnetics. Geophysics 53(8):1096–1108

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Götze H-J, Gabriel G, Giszas V, Hese F, Kirsch R, Köther N, Schmidt S, Student Field Crew 2005 (2009) The ice age paleo-channel “Ellerbeker Rinne”—an integrated 3D gravity study. Zeitschr der deutsch Ges Geowiss 160(3):279–293

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirsch R, Rumpel H-M, Scheer W, Wiederhold H (2006) Groundwater resources in buried valleys—a challenge for geosciences. Report, Bur val working group, Leibniz Institute for Applied Geosciences, 303 p

  • Loke MH, Acworth I, Dahlin T (2003) A comparison of smooth and blocky inversion methods in 2D electrical imaging surveys. Explor Geophys 34:182–187

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loke MH, Wilkinson PB, Chambers JE, Strutt M (2014) Optimized arrays for 2D cross-borehole electrical tomography surveys. Geophys Prospect 62:172–189

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mavko G, Mukerji T (1998) Bounds on low frequency seismic velocities in partially saturated rocks. Geophysics 63:918–924

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pruess K, Oldenburg C, Moridis G (1999) TOUGH2 user’s guide. Earth Sciences Division, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, University of California, Berkeley, 94720: 212 p

  • Schmidt S, Plonka C, Götze H-J, Lahmeyer B (2011) Hybrid modelling of gravity, gravity gradients and magnetic fields. Geophys Prospect 59(6):1046–1051

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stummer P, Maurer H, Green AG (2004) Experimental design: electrical resistivity data sets that provide optimum subsurface information. Geophysics 69:120–139

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Genuchten MT (1980) A closed form equation for predicting the hydraulic conductivity of unsaturated soils. Soil Sci Soc Am 44(5):892–898

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wenske I, Mispel J, Köhn, D (2011) 2D Joint full waveform inversion of elastic surface and VSP seismic data in time domain. 73rd conference of the European association of geoscientists and engineers, Wienna, 4p

  • Wiederhold H, Rumpel H-M, Auken E, Siemon B, Scheer W, Kirsch R (2008) Geophysikalische Verfahren zur Erkundung und Charakterisierung von Grundwasserleitern in quartären Rinnen, Grundwasser. Zeitsch der Fachsekt Hydrogeol 13:68–77

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilkinson PB, Meldrum PI, Chambers JE, Kuras O, Ogilvy RD (2006) Improved strategies for the automatic selection of optimised sets of electrical resistivity tomography measurement configurations. Geophys J Int 167:1119–1126

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Special thanks to W. Scheer (from the geological state office of Schleswig-Holstein, Germany) for providing the geologic model, H.-J. Götze and S. Schmidt for providing the software IGMAS+, and B. Driehaus and B. Weise for computer work. This study has been carried out within the framework of the ANGUS+ research project funded by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF), Grant Number 03EK3022. We thank our project partners for efficient collaborations.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Said A. al Hagrey.

Additional information

This article is part of a Topical Collection in Environmental Earth Sciences on ‘‘Subsurface Energy Storage’’.

Guest edited by Sebastian Bauer, Andreas Dahmke, and Olaf Kolditz.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

al Hagrey, S.A., Schäfer, D., Köhn, D. et al. Monitoring gas leakages simulated in a near surface aquifer of the Ellerbek paleo-channel. Environ Earth Sci 75, 1083 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-016-5784-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-016-5784-1

Keywords

  • Renewable energy
  • Compressed air energy storage
  • Multiphase simulation
  • Geophysical monitoring
  • Waveform inversion
  • Electrical resistivity tomography
  • Gravity