Clay: Geologic Formations, Carbon Management, and Industry

Chapter
Part of the Green Energy and Technology book series (GREEN)

Abstract

The term clay is used interchangeably for the particles and the minerals, the latter commonly referred to as clay minerals to distinguish them from the clay particle size. Clay sediments are typically deposited in quiet-water environments, settling out as fine-grained mud, which may then be buried and lithified into shale. The quiet-water depositional environments are favorable for deposition of organic material as well, which over geologic time, may result in the shale becoming a source rock for petroleum and natural gas. Hydrocarbons have traditionally been produced from porous and permeable reservoir rock, where they had migrated from source rock and become concentrated in geologic traps. The recent development of “unconventional resources” like shale gas and tight oil has allowed hydrocarbons to be produced directly from the source rock. Conventional natural gas and oil reservoirs that have been depleted of hydrocarbons provide a viable option for secure carbon storage because there is a known trap and seal. CO2 can potentially be used for enhanced recovery of the hydrocarbons and for pressure management in shale, to minimize the loss of permeability that comes from increased net stress during drawdown. As a side note, natural clay-rich geomaterials can be used in agriculture, industrial processes, and for clay liners in chemical and radioactive waste disposal sites. The purpose of addressing geomaterials here is to give the readers an idea of the enormous breadth of each subject and point them toward other resources for additional information.

References

  1. Adair, R. K. (2012, March). Another exchange on climate change. Physics Today, 65(3), p. 8.Google Scholar
  2. Ahn, C. H., Dilmore, R., & Wang, J. Y. (2014). Development of innovative and efficient hydraulic fracturing numerical simulation model and parametric studies in unconventional naturally fractured reservoirs. Journal of Unconventional Oil and Gas Resources, 8, 25–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bao, X., & Eaton, D. W. (2016). Fault activation by hydraulic fracturing in Western Canada. Science, 354(6318), pp. 1406–1409.Google Scholar
  4. Brindley, G. W. (1955). Structural mineralogy of clays. California Division of Mines Bulletin, 169, 33–43.Google Scholar
  5. Busch, A., et al. (2008). Carbon dioxide storage potential of shales. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 2(3), 297–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Busch, A., et al. (2009). Effects of physical sorption and chemical reactions of CO2 in shaly caprocks. Energy Procedia, 1(1), 3229–3235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Carter, C. B., & Norton, M. G. (2007). ceramic materials science and engineering. New York: Springer Science and Business Media.Google Scholar
  8. Charpentier, R. R., & Cook, T. A. (2011). USGS methodology for assessing continuous petroleum resources. Reston, VA: U.S. Geological Survey.Google Scholar
  9. Chen, R., et al. (2015). Comparison of isotopic and geochemical characteristics of sediments from a gas- and liquids-prone wells in Marcellus Shale from Appalachian Basin, West Virginia. Applied Geochemistry, 60, 59–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Chermak, J. A., & Schreiber, M. E. (2014). Mineralogy and trace element geochemistry of gas shales in the United States: environmental implications. International Journal of Coal Geology, 126, 32–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Curtis, J. (2002). Fractured shale-gas systems. AAPG Bulletin, 86(11), 1921–1938.Google Scholar
  12. Dilmore, R., et al. (2015). Experimental characterization of Marcellus Shale outcrop samples, and their interactions with carbon dioxide and methane. Morgantown, WV: U.S. Department of Energy.Google Scholar
  13. Engelder, T., & Lash, G. G. (2008, May). Marcellus Shale play’s vast resource potential creating stir in Appalachia. The American Oil and Gas Reporter, p. 7.Google Scholar
  14. Frazier, R. R. (2017). Pennsylvania confirms first fracking-related earthquakes. Available online at: http://www.alleghenyfront.org/pennsylvania-confirms-first-fracking-related-earthquakes/. Accessed 3 May 2017.
  15. Godec, M., Koperna, G., Petrusak, R., & Oudinot, A. (2013). Potential for enhanced gas recovery and CO2 storage in the Marcellus Shale in Eastern United States. International Journal of Coal Geology, 118, 95–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Goodman, A., et al. (2011). U.S. DOE methodology for the development of geologic storage potential for carbon dioxide at the national and regional scale. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 5(4), 952–965.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Goodman, A., et al. (2013). Comparison of methods for geologic storage of carbon dioxide in saline formations. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 18, 329–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Goral, J., Miskovic, I., Gelb, J. & Kasahara, J. (2015). Pore network investigation in Marcellus Shale Rock Matrix: Paper SPE-176988-MS. Brisbane, Australia: Society of Petroleum Engineers.Google Scholar
  19. Guggenheim, S., & Koster van Groos, A. (2003). Experimental investigation of methane gas production from methane hydrate. Geology, 31(7), 653–655.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hong, L., et al. (2016). Factors affecting the interaction of CO2 and CH4 in Marcellus Shale from the Appalachian Basin. Journal of Unconventional Oil and Gas Resources, 14, 99–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hosterman, J. W., & Whitlow, S. I. (1980). Munsell color value as related to organic carbon in Devonian Shale of the Appalachian Basin. Reston, VA: U.S. Geological Survey.Google Scholar
  22. Hosterman, J. W., & Whitlow, S. I. (1981). Munsell color value as related to organic carbon in Devonian Shale of Appalachian Basin. AAPG Bulletin, 65(2), 333–335.Google Scholar
  23. IPCC. (2007). Climate change 2007: The physical science basis. Working Group I contribution to the fourth assessment report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Jarvie, D. (2012). Shale resource systems for oil and gas: Part 1—Shale-gas resource systems. AAPG Memoir, 97, 69–87.Google Scholar
  25. Kerr, P. F. (1955). Formation and occurrence of clay minerals. California Division of Mines Bulletin, 169, 33–43.Google Scholar
  26. Kingery, W. D., Bowen, H. K., & Uhlmann, D. R. (1976). Introduction to ceramics (2nd ed.). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  27. Kulga, B., Dilmore, R., Wyatt, C., & Ertekin, T. (2014). Investigation of CO 2 storage and enhanced gas recovery in Depleted Shale gas formations using a dual-porosity/dual-permeability, multiphase, reservoir simulator. Morgantown, WV: U.S. Department of Energy.Google Scholar
  28. Lentz, R. D. (2003). Inhibiting water infiltration with polyacrylamide and surfactants: Applications for irrigated agriculture. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 58(5), 290–300.Google Scholar
  29. Levine, J. S., et al. (2016). U.S. DOE NETL methodology for estimating the prospective CO2 storage resource of shales at the national and regional scale. International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 51, 81–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Matter, J. M., et al. (2016). Rapid carbon mineralization for permanent disposal of anthropogenic carbon dioxide emissions. Science, 352(6291), 1312–1314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Middleton, R. S., et al. (2015). Shale gas and non-aqueous fracturing fluids: Opportunities and challenges for supercritical CO2. Applied Energy, 147, 500–509.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Nuttall, B., Ebble, C., Drahovzal, J. A., & Bustin, R. M. (2005). Analysis of Devonian black shales in Kentucky for potential carbon dioxide sequestration and enhanced natural gas production. Lexington, KY: University of Kentucky.Google Scholar
  33. Page, J. B. (1955). Role of physical properties of clays in soil science. California Division of Mines Bulletin, 169, 167–176.Google Scholar
  34. Parikh, S. J., & James, B. R. (2012). Soil: The foundation of agriculture. Nature Education Knowledge, 3(10), 2.Google Scholar
  35. Pask, J. A. & Turner, M. D. (Eds.) (1955). Clays and clay technology: Proceedings of the First National Conference on Clays and Clay Technology (1st ed.). San Francisco: State of California, Division of Mines.Google Scholar
  36. Pierrehumbert, R. T. (2011, March). Infrared radiation and planetary temperature. Physics Today, 64(1), pp. 33–38.Google Scholar
  37. Poore, R. Z., Williams Jr., R. S. & Tracey, C. (2000). Sea level and climate: U.S. Geological Survey Fact Sheet 002–00. Available online at: https://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/fs2-00/. Accessed December 2013.
  38. Randolph, P. L., & Soeder, D. J. (1986). Rock matrix analysis of eastern gas shale and western tight gas sands. Final report, October 1, 1983–December 31, 1984. Institute of Gas Technology: Chicago, IL.Google Scholar
  39. Romanov, V., et al. (2015). Mineralization of carbon dioxide: A literature review. ChemBioEng Reviews, 2(4), 231–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Schieber, J. (1994). Evidence for high-energy events and shallow-water deposition in the Chattanooga Shale, Devonian, central Tennessee, USA. Sedimentary Geology, 93(3–4), 193–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Schieber, J. (2010). Common themes in the formation and preservation of intrinsic porosity in shales and mudstones—illustrated with examples across the Phanerozoic: Paper SPE-132370-MS (pp. 1–10). Richardson, TX: Society of Petroleum Engineers.Google Scholar
  42. Soeder, D. J. (1988). Porosity and permeability of Eastern Devonian Gas Shale. SPE Formation Evaluation, 3(1), 116–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Soeder, D. J. (2012). Shale gas development in the United States. In H. Al-Megren (Ed.), Advances in natural gas technology (pp. 3–28). Rijeka, Croatia: InTech.Google Scholar
  44. Soeder, D. J. & Kappel, W. M., 2009. Water resources and natural gas production from the Marcellus Shale: U.S. Geological Survey Fact Sheet 2009–3032. Available online at: https://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2009/3032/. Accessed 24 April 2017.
  45. Soeder, D. J., Randolph, P. L., & Matthews, R. D. (1986). Porosity and permeability of Eastern Devonian Gas Shale. Chicago, IL: Institute of Gas Technology.Google Scholar
  46. Soeder, D. J., et al. (2014). An approach for assessing engineering risk from shale gas wells in the United States. International Journal of Coal Geology, 126, 4–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Tao, Z., & Clarens, A. (2013). Estimating the carbon sequestration capacity of shale formations using methane production rate. Environmental Science and Technology, 47(19), 11318–11325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. U.S. Department of Energy. (2015). Carbon storage Atlas (5th ed.). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Energy.Google Scholar
  49. U.S. Energy Information Administration. (2017). Annual Energy Outlook 2017: USEIA report DOE/EIA-0383(2017). Available online at: https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/aeo/index.cfm. Accessed 23 April 2017.
  50. U.S. Geological Survey. (2016). Induced earthquakes. Available online at: https://earthquake.usgs.gov/research/induced/. Accessed 3 May 2017.
  51. Vermylen, J. P. (2011). Geomechanical studies of the Barnett Shale, Texas, USA [Ph.D. dissertation]. Stanford, CA: Stanford University, SRB (Vol. 125).Google Scholar
  52. Watson, T. L., & Bachu, S. (2009). Evaluation of the potential for gas and CO2 leakage along wellbores: Paper SPE-106817-PA. SPE Drilling & Completion, 24(1), 115–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Zoback, M. D., & Gorelick, S. M. (2012). Earthquake triggering and large-scale geologic storage of carbon dioxide. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science of the United States of America, 109(26), 10164–10168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.U.S. Department of Energy, National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL)PittsburghUSA

Personalised recommendations