Coupled Flow and Geomechanics Model for CO2 Storage in Tight Gas Reservoir

  • Awez HanegaonkarEmail author
  • Tapan Kidambi
  • G. Suresh Kumar
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Civil Engineering book series (LNCE, volume 22)


The process of injection and withdrawal from tight gas reservoirs is a multiphysics and multicomponent problem. The aim of the present work is to capture the physics associated with the injection of CO2 into tight shales, and assess and mitigate the risks associated with reservoir overpressure. The overpressure caused by CO2 injection usually triggers the onset of formation–deformation, which inadvertently affects the state of the stress in the target geological formations and its surroundings, the monitoring of which is critical to understand the risks in conjunction with CO2 storage. In the present work, a novel fully coupled fully implicit flow and geomechanics simulator is introduced to describe the physics in conjunction with an extended injection phase of CO2. The developed model solves for pressure saturation and porosity and permeability changes considering a multicomponent system while principally focusing on the adsorption and diffusion of CO2 and stress-dependent reservoir deformation employing cell-centred finite volume method. It is envisaged that the injection of CO2, while with the primary purpose of storage, will parallelly enhance the recovery from shale gas due to lateral sweep effects. Based on these mechanisms, for the case study of a tight gas field, the applicability of the simulation model is tested for formations with varied rock and fluid moduli in a 20-year simulation period.


CO2 storage Reservoir simulation Fluid flow and geomechanics Multiphase flow Tight gas reservoir 


  1. 1.
    Pettersen Ø (2008) Using relations between stress and fluid pressure for improved compaction modelling in flow simulation and increased efficiency in coupled rock mechanics simulation. Pet Geosci 14(4):399–409CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Leung Dennis YC, Giorgio C, Mercedes MMV (2014) An overview of current status of carbon dioxide capture and storage technologies. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 39:426–443. Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bachu S, Adams JJ (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(20):3151–3175. Scholar
  4. 4.
    Celia MA, Nordbotten JM (2009) Practical modeling approaches for geological storage of carbon dioxide. Ground Water 47(5):627–638CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Van der Zwaan B, Smekens K (2009) CO2 capture and storage with leakage in an energy-climate model. Environ Model Assess 14(2):135–148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Guo M, Lu X, Nielsen CP, McElroy MB, Shi W, Chen Y, Xu Y (2016) Prospects for shale gas production in china: implications for water demand. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 66:742–750CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cipolla CL, Lolon EP, Erdle JC, Rubin B et al (2010) Reservoir modeling in shalegas reservoirs. SPE Reservoir Eval Eng 13(04):638–653CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Godec M, Koperna G, Petrusak R, Oudinot A (2013) Potential for enhanced gas recovery and CO2 storage in the marcellus shale in the eastern united states. Int J Coal Geol 118:95–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Nuttall BC, Drahovzal JA, Eble CF (2005). Analysis of devonian black shales in kentucky for potential carbon dioxide sequestration and enhanced natural gas production. Report Kentucky Geological Survey/University of Kentucky (DE-FC26-02NT41442)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Schepers KC, Nuttall BC, Oudinot AY, Gonzalez RJ et al (2009). Reservoir modeling and simulation of the devonian gas shale of eastern kentucky for enhanced gas recovery and CO2 storage. In SPE International Conference on CO2 Capture, Storage, and Utilization. Society of Petroleum EngineersGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kang SM, Fathi E, Ambrose RJ, Akkutlu IY, Sigal RF et al (2011) Carbon dioxide storage capacity of organic-rich shales. SPE J 16(04):842–855CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Martinez MJ, Newell P, Bishop JE, Turner DZ (2013) Coupled multiphase flow and geomechanics model for analysis of joint reactivation during CO2 sequestration operations. Int J Greenhouse Gas Control 17:148–160. Scholar
  13. 13.
    Birkholzer Jens T, Zhou Quanlin, Tsang Chin-Fu (2009) Large-scale impact of CO2 storage in deep saline aquifers: a sensitivity study on pressure response in stratified systems. Int J Greenhouse Gas Control 3(2):181–194. Scholar
  14. 14.
    Person M, Banerjee A, Rupp J, Medina C, Lichtner P, Gable C, Pawar R, Celia M, McIntosh J, Bense V (2010) Assessment of basin-scale hydrologic impacts of CO2 sequestration, Illinois basin. Int J Greenhouse Gas Control 4(5):840–854CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kim TH, Cho J, Lee KS (2017) Evaluation of CO2 injection in shale gas reservoirs with multi-component transport and geomechanical effects, Appl Energy 190, 1195–1206, ISSN 0306-2619, Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lewis RW, Schrefler BA (1998) The finite element method in the static and dynamic deformation and consolidation of porous media. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Albinali A, Kazemi H, Alghamdi B et al (2011) Geomechanics and fluid flow modelling using finite-difference methodGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Longuemare P, Mainguy M, Lemonnier P, Onaisi A, Gérard C, Koutsabeloulis N (2002) Geomechanics in reservoir simulation: overview of coupling methods and field case study. Oil Gas Sci Technol 57(5):471–483CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Minkoff SE, Stone CM, Bryant S, Peszynska M, Wheeler MF (2003) Coupled fluid flow and geomechanical deformation modeling. J Petrol Sci Eng 38(1):37–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Brooks RH, Corey AT (1966) Properties of porous media affecting fluid flow. J Irrig Drainage Div ASCE 92(IR2):61–88Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Palmer I, Mansoori J (1998) How permeability depends on stress and pore pressure in coalbeds: a new model. SPE Reserv Eng 1(6):539–543Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Langmuir I (1916) The evaporation, condensation and reflection of molecules and the mechanism of adsorption. Phys Rev Lett. Scholar
  23. 23.
    Carman G (1996) Structural elements of onshore Kuwait GeoArabia, pp 239–266Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Neele F, Vandeweijer V, Mayyan H, Sharma SR, Kamal D (2017) Options for CO2 sequestration in Kuwait. In: Energy Procedia, 13th International Conference on Greenhouse Gas Control Technologies, GHGT-13, 14–18 Nov 2016, Lausanne, SwitzerlandCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Kidambi T, Kumar GS (2016) Mechanical earth modeling for a vertical well drilled in a naturally fractured tight carbonate gas reservoir in the Persian Gulf. J Pet Sci Eng 141:38–51. Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Awez Hanegaonkar
    • 1
    Email author
  • Tapan Kidambi
    • 1
  • G. Suresh Kumar
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Ocean EngineeringIndian Institute of Technology MadrasChennaiIndia

Personalised recommendations